Sudhir Dubey vs State of Uttar Pradesh — 247/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483. Disposed: Uncontested--DISPOSED on 18th March 2026.

BAIL APPLICATION

CNR: UPSN010007742026

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

697/2026

Filing Date

09-03-2026

Registration No

247/2026

Registration Date

09-03-2026

Court

District and Session Judge

Judge

6-ADJ/Spl. Judge POCSO-I Bhadohi

Decision Date

18th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--DISPOSED

FIR Details

FIR Number

98

Police Station

GOPIGANJ

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483

Petitioner(s)

Sudhir Dubey

Adv. Chhotelal Singh

Respondent(s)

State of Uttar Pradesh

Hearing History

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

18-03-2026

Disposed

13-03-2026

Hearing

09-03-2026

Hearing

Final Orders / Judgements

18-03-2026
PDF of Bail Order

Court Decision Summary The Special Additional Sessions Judge (POCSO) rejected the bail petition of Sudhir Dubey, accused under Section 3(1) of the UP Gangster Act, 1986 for his alleged involvement in gang-related criminal activities including theft and attempted murder. The court found prima facie evidence that the accused was part of an organized gang and therefore did not meet the stringent bail criteria under Section 19(4) of the Gangster Act, which requires proof that the accused is not guilty and poses no risk of reoffense. The bail petition was accordingly dismissed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Court Decision Summary The Special Additional Sessions Judge (POCSO) rejected the bail petition of Sudhir Dubey, accused under Section 3(1) of the UP Gangster Act, 1986 for his alleged involvement in gang-related criminal activities including theft and attempted murder. The court found prima facie evidence that the accused was part of an organized gang and therefore did not meet the stringent bail criteria under Section 19(4) of the Gangster Act, which requires proof that the accused is not guilty and poses no risk of reoffense. The bail petition was accordingly dismissed. 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