Shubham Bind vs State of Uttar Pradesh Advocate - Dinesh Kumar Pandey — 255/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 137(2),87,. Disposed: Uncontested--DISPOSED on 13th March 2026.

BAIL APPLICATION

CNR: UPSN010007702026

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

693/2026

Filing Date

09-03-2026

Registration No

255/2026

Registration Date

09-03-2026

Court

District and Session Judge

Judge

6-ADJ/Spl. Judge POCSO-I Bhadohi

Decision Date

13th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--DISPOSED

FIR Details

FIR Number

39

Police Station

KOTWALI GYANPUR

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 137(2),87,

Petitioner(s)

Shubham Bind

Adv. Om Prakash Bind

Respondent(s)

State of Uttar Pradesh Advocate - Dinesh Kumar Pandey

Hearing History

Judge: 6-ADJ/Spl. Judge POCSO-I Bhadohi

13-03-2026

Disposed

09-03-2026

Hearing

Final Orders / Judgements

13-03-2026
PDF of Bail Order

Summary The Special Additional Sessions Court (POCSO-I), Ghazipur-Bhadohi granted bail to 22-year-old Shubham Bind in a case involving charges under Sections 137(2) and 87 of the BNS, finding that the victim's statement contained significant contradictions and that she had voluntarily accompanied the accused out of her own will. The court noted that while the victim initially stated she was abducted and raped, in her subsequent statement under Section 183 CrPC, she clarified she left home willingly, wished to marry the accused, and denied any sexual assault. Accordingly, the court accepted the bail application on conditions including a personal bond of ₹50,000 with two sureties and standard bail restrictions. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The Special Additional Sessions Court (POCSO-I), Ghazipur-Bhadohi granted bail to 22-year-old Shubham Bind in a case involving charges under Sections 137(2) and 87 of the BNS, finding that the victim's statement contained significant contradictions and that she had voluntarily accompanied the accused out of her own will. The court noted that while the victim initially stated she was abducted and raped, in her subsequent statement under Section 183 CrPC, she clarified she left home willingly, wished to marry the accused, and denied any sexual assault. Accordingly, the court accepted the bail application on conditions including a personal bond of ₹50,000 with two sureties and standard bail restrictions. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

District and Session Judge All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case