mahfooj vs State — 140/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 137(2),74,127(2). Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 10th March 2026.

Case disposed

Bail Application

CNR: UPSR010003852026

Filing Number

360/2026

Filing Date

23-Feb-2026

Registration No

140/2026

Registration Date

23-Feb-2026

Court

District and Session Judge

Judge

6-Additional District and Sessions Judge/Special Judge(Exclusive POCSO Act)

Decision Date

10-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED

Last updated 23-Apr-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

57

Police Station

Bhinga

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 137(2),74,127(2)
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 Section 7,8

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.mahfooj

    Adv. Pravin Kumar Tripathi

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.State

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 10-Mar-2026

    Copy of OrderView PDF

    Summary The court granted bail to the accused Mahfooj in a case involving charges under IPC Sections 137(2), 74, 127(2) and POCSO Act Sections 7/8. The court found significant contradictions in the victim's statements under Sections 180 and 183 of the CrPC, noting that her statement under Section 183 did not corroborate the allegations made in Section 180, and observed there was no credible evidence that the accused had taken the victim away or committed the alleged offense. The accused was released on bail with a personal bond of ₹50,000 and an undertaking to appear during trial. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 10-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Additional District and Sessions Judge/Special Judge(Exclusive POCSO Act)

  4. 07-Mar-2026

    Hearing

    Additional District and Sessions Judge/Special Judge(Exclusive POCSO Act)

  5. 26-Feb-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 23-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 140/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The court granted bail to the accused Mahfooj in a case involving charges under IPC Sections 137(2), 74, 127(2) and POCSO Act Sections 7/8. The court found significant contradictions in the victim's statements under Sections 180 and 183 of the CrPC, noting that her statement under Section 183 did not corroborate the allegations made in Section 180, and observed there was no credible evidence that the accused had taken the victim away or committed the alleged offense. The accused was released on bail with a personal bond of ₹50,000 and an undertaking to appear during trial. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case