PAWAN GOPE vs THE STATE OF JHARKHAND Advocate - KUMARI RASHMI — B.A./2285/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 326(f),3(5),BNS,17,CLA,ACT. Disposed: Contested--Bail on 23rd March 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: JHHC010069562026

Filing Number

B.A./4598/2026

Filing Date

24-Feb-2026

Registration No

B.A./2285/2026

Registration Date

18-Mar-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pradeep Kumar Srivastava

Coram

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pradeep Kumar Srivastava

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE ( 121 )

Sub-Category

Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1952 ( 3 )

Judicial Branch

Criminal Section

Decision Date

23-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Bail

Last updated 26-Mar-2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 326(f),3(5),BNS,17,CLA,ACT

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.PAWAN GOPE

    Adv. GAURAV

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.THE STATE OF JHARKHAND Advocate - KUMARI RASHMI

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 23-Mar-2026

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pradeep Kumar SrivastavaView PDF

    Case Summary: B.A. No. 2285 of 2026 The Jharkhand High Court granted bail to Pawan Gope, accused in a vehicle arson case under BNS Sections 326(f), 3(5), and CLA Act Section 17. The court found merit in the petitioner's arguments that he was falsely implicated based solely on co-accused statements, was not named in the FIR, no incriminating evidence was recovered, and multiple co-accused had already been granted bail. The petitioner was released on Rs. 20,000 bail bond with two sureties, conditional upon physical court attendance and non-interference with evidence or witnesses. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 23-Mar-2026

    Fresh Filing (Admission)

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pradeep Kumar Srivastava

  4. 24-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. B.A./2285/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: B.A. No. 2285 of 2026 The Jharkhand High Court granted bail to Pawan Gope, accused in a vehicle arson case under BNS Sections 326(f), 3(5), and CLA Act Section 17. The court found merit in the petitioner's arguments that he was falsely implicated based solely on co-accused statements, was not named in the FIR, no incriminating evidence was recovered, and multiple co-accused had already been granted bail. The petitioner was released on Rs. 20,000 bail bond with two sureties, conditional upon physical court attendance and non-interference with evidence or witnesses. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case