ARJUN YADAV vs THE STATE OF JHARKHAND Advocate - SANTOSH KUMAR SHUKLA — A.B.A./2296/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 272,274,275,292/3(5),BNS,47(a),(f),EXCISE,ACT. Disposed: Contested--Allowed on 08th May 2026.
CNR: JHHC010098312026
Filing Number
A.B.A./6372/2026
Filing Date
23-Mar-2026
Registration No
A.B.A./2296/2026
Registration Date
27-Apr-2026
Judge
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi
Coram
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi
Bench Type
Single Bench
Category
CUSTOM & EXCISE ( 122 )
Sub-Category
Excise (malt Liquors) Act,1890 ( 8 )
Judicial Branch
Criminal Section
Decision Date
08-May-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Allowed
Last updated 04-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.ARJUN YADAV
Adv. ANURAG KUMAR
Respondent(s)
-
1.THE STATE OF JHARKHAND Advocate - SANTOSH KUMAR SHUKLA
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
08-May-2026
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Kumar DwivediView PDF
Summary The Jharkhand High Court granted anticipatory bail to Arjun Yadav in a case involving alleged manufacturing/selling of illicit Mahuwa liquor. The court found that the petitioner's name appeared only on suspicion, the informant was not disclosed in the FIR, and he had no criminal antecedents. Yadav was directed to surrender within three weeks and be released on bail of Rs. 25,000 with two sureties of equal amount each. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
08-May-2026
Fresh Filing (Admission)
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi
-
13-Apr-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
23-Mar-2026
Case filed
Registration No. A.B.A./2296/2026
Summary The Jharkhand High Court granted anticipatory bail to Arjun Yadav in a case involving alleged manufacturing/selling of illicit Mahuwa liquor. The court found that the petitioner's name appeared only on suspicion, the informant was not disclosed in the FIR, and he had no criminal antecedents. Yadav was directed to surrender within three weeks and be released on bail of Rs. 25,000 with two sureties of equal amount each. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts