ZAMAN ALI vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Advocate - A.G. — MCRC/3125/2026

Disposed: Contested--REJECTED on 07th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: CGHC010115762026

Filing Number

MCRC/4914/2026

Filing Date

19-Mar-2026

Registration No

MCRC/3125/2026

Registration Date

04-Apr-2026

Judge

Hon'ble The Chief Justice

Coram

Hon'ble The Chief Justice

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

CRIMINAL MATTERS ( 14 )

Sub-Category

Other ( 4 )

Judicial Branch

Criminal Section

Decision Date

07-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--REJECTED

Last updated 05-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.ZAMAN ALI

    Adv. RAJESH KUMAR KESHARWANI,Juhi Anguriya,Juhi Anguriya, ,SHRIJITA KESHARWANI,Juhi Anguriya

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Advocate - A.G.

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 07-May-2026

    Hon'ble The Chief JusticeView PDF

    Case Summary: MCRC 3125/2026 Decision: The High Court of Chhattisgarh rejected Zaman Ali's third bail application in a drug possession case under Section 20(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. The court found the case unsuitable for bail due to the commercial quantity of contraband involved (11.324 kg of ganja), the applicant's ten criminal antecedents including a pending NDPS offense, and ongoing trial proceedings with material witnesses yet to be examined. Though the applicant submitted video evidence disputing the arrest circumstances, the court deferred evidentiary examination to trial. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 08-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble The Chief JusticeView PDF

  4. 08-Apr-2026

    Fresh Matters

    Hon'ble The Chief Justice

  5. 19-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. MCRC/3125/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: MCRC 3125/2026 Decision: The High Court of Chhattisgarh rejected Zaman Ali's third bail application in a drug possession case under Section 20(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. The court found the case unsuitable for bail due to the commercial quantity of contraband involved (11.324 kg of ganja), the applicant's ten criminal antecedents including a pending NDPS offense, and ongoing trial proceedings with material witnesses yet to be examined. Though the applicant submitted video evidence disputing the arrest circumstances, the court deferred evidentiary examination to trial. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case