Suraj Pandey vs state — 695/2026

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 394,323,504,506. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED on 18th March 2026.

Case disposed

Bail Application

CNR: UPST010023112026

Filing Number

2126/2026

Filing Date

12-Mar-2026

Registration No

695/2026

Registration Date

12-Mar-2026

Court

District and Session Judge

Judge

2-ADJ 1

Decision Date

18-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISPOSED

Last updated 28-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

1387

Police Station

Kotwali Kadipur

Year

2008

Acts & Sections

Indian Penal Code Section 394,323,504,506

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Suraj Pandey

    Adv. ARVIND KUMAR DUBEY

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.state

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 18-Mar-2026

    Copy of document.View PDF

    Case Summary: 695/2026 - Suraj Pandey v. State Decision: The court rejected Suraj Pandey's interim bail application. The petitioner was accused of robbery, criminal intimidation, and assault (IPC sections 394, 323, 504, 506) in an incident on June 5, 2008, where he allegedly robbed ₹10,000 from the complainant and assaulted him. Court's Reasoning: While the court acknowledged Supreme Court precedent requiring prima facie evidence against an accused before bail denial, it found sufficient initial evidence in the FIR and witness statements establishing the petitioner's involvement in the offense. The court determined that adequate grounds existed to proceed with the case and that bail rejection did not violate personal liberty protections in cases with demonstrable prima facie evidence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 18-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    ADJ 1

  4. 13-Mar-2026

    Hearing

    District & Session Judge

  5. 12-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 12-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 695/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: 695/2026 - Suraj Pandey v. State Decision: The court rejected Suraj Pandey's interim bail application. The petitioner was accused of robbery, criminal intimidation, and assault (IPC sections 394, 323, 504, 506) in an incident on June 5, 2008, where he allegedly robbed ₹10,000 from the complainant and assaulted him. Court's Reasoning: While the court acknowledged Supreme Court precedent requiring prima facie evidence against an accused before bail denial, it found sufficient initial evidence in the FIR and witness statements establishing the petitioner's involvement in the offense. The court determined that adequate grounds existed to proceed with the case and that bail rejection did not violate personal liberty protections in cases with demonstrable prima facie evidence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case