Vineet Kumar urf Bablu vs state — 596/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 109(1),3(5),115(2),352,351(3). Disposed: Contested--REJECT on 19th March 2026.
Bail Application
CNR: UPST010018622026
Filing Number
1695/2026
Filing Date
27-Feb-2026
Registration No
596/2026
Registration Date
27-Feb-2026
Court
District and Session Judge
Judge
1-District & Session Judge
Decision Date
19-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--REJECT
Last updated 28-May-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
44
Police Station
Gauri gang
Year
2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Vineet Kumar urf Bablu
Respondent(s)
-
1.state
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
19-Mar-2026
JudgementView PDF
Case Summary: 596/2026 Court Decision: The bail petition of Vineet Kumar alias Bablu in FIR No. 44/2026 (charges under IPC Sections 109(1), 115(2), 351(3), 352, and 3(5)) has been rejected/dismissed. Key Reasoning: The court found sufficient grounds to deny bail based on the FIR allegations that the petitioner, along with accomplices, allegedly attacked the complainant and his wife with sticks and iron rods, causing serious injuries including head trauma, fractured hand, and injuries to the eyes and nose. The court noted that the victim's medical reports corroborated the violent nature of the attack, and the accused's defense claims of false implication were deemed unconvincing against the documented medical evidence and witness statements. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
19-Mar-2026
Disposed
District & Session Judge
-
18-Mar-2026
Hearing
District & Session Judge
-
12-Mar-2026
Hearing
District & Session Judge
-
09-Mar-2026
Hearing
District & Session Judge
-
27-Feb-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
27-Feb-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 596/2026
Case Summary: 596/2026 Court Decision: The bail petition of Vineet Kumar alias Bablu in FIR No. 44/2026 (charges under IPC Sections 109(1), 115(2), 351(3), 352, and 3(5)) has been rejected/dismissed. Key Reasoning: The court found sufficient grounds to deny bail based on the FIR allegations that the petitioner, along with accomplices, allegedly attacked the complainant and his wife with sticks and iron rods, causing serious injuries including head trauma, fractured hand, and injuries to the eyes and nose. The court noted that the victim's medical reports corroborated the violent nature of the attack, and the accused's defense claims of false implication were deemed unconvincing against the documented medical evidence and witness statements. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts