ASHU URF AAS MOHAMAD vs State of U.P. — 1065/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 109(1). Disposed: Contested--DECIDED on 18th March 2026.

Case disposed

Bail Application

CNR: UPSP010032412026

Filing Number

2974/2026

Filing Date

12-Mar-2026

Registration No

1065/2026

Registration Date

12-Mar-2026

Court

District and Session Judge

Judge

1-District Judge

Decision Date

18-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DECIDED

Last updated 28-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

157

Police Station

DEOBAND

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 109(1)
Arms Act Section 3,25,27

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.ASHU URF AAS MOHAMAD

    Adv. DGC

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.State of U.P.

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 18-Mar-2026

    Copy of Bail OrderView PDF

    Case Summary: 1065/2026 - Ashu Urf Aas Mohamad v. State of U.P. The court granted bail to the petitioner, Ashu Urf Aas Mohamad, who was accused under IPC Section 109(1) and Arms Act Sections 3/25/27 for allegedly firing on police with intent to cause death during a March 3, 2026 encounter in Saharanpur. The court found insufficient independent evidence linking the petitioner to the alleged weapons seizure, no confirmed injury to any police officer, and noted the petitioner had been in judicial custody since March 4, 2026. Bail was approved on personal bond of ₹40,000 with a surety, subject to conditions including appearance at all hearings and non-intimidation of witnesses. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 18-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    District Judge

  4. 12-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  5. 12-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 1065/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: 1065/2026 - Ashu Urf Aas Mohamad v. State of U.P. The court granted bail to the petitioner, Ashu Urf Aas Mohamad, who was accused under IPC Section 109(1) and Arms Act Sections 3/25/27 for allegedly firing on police with intent to cause death during a March 3, 2026 encounter in Saharanpur. The court found insufficient independent evidence linking the petitioner to the alleged weapons seizure, no confirmed injury to any police officer, and noted the petitioner had been in judicial custody since March 4, 2026. Bail was approved on personal bond of ₹40,000 with a surety, subject to conditions including appearance at all hearings and non-intimidation of witnesses. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case