STATE vs MANISH KUMAR — 446/2026

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 420/34. Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 27th March 2026.

Bail Matters

CNR: DLWT010030772026

Case disposed

Filing Number

997/2026

Filing Date

12-03-2026

Registration No

446/2026

Registration Date

12-03-2026

Court

District and Sessions Judge, West, THC

Judge

156-Special Judge

Decision Date

27th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISMISSED

FIR Details

FIR Number

86

Police Station

Moti Nagar

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

Indian Penal Code Section 420/34

Petitioner(s)

STATE

Adv. xyz

Respondent(s)

MANISH KUMAR

Hearing History

Judge: 156-Special Judge

27-03-2026

Disposed

20-03-2026

For Bail

19-03-2026

For Bail

17-03-2026

For Bail

13-03-2026

For Bail

Final Orders / Judgements

27-03-2026
COPY OF ORDER

Case Summary: STATE v. MANISH KUMAR (446/2026) Decision: The court rejected Manish Kumar's anticipatory bail application. The judge found the allegations against Kumar serious—involving alleged cheating and fraud in a property transaction worth Rs. 20 lakhs where he allegedly helped facilitate the sale, wrote receipt entries, and later retained the original bayana agreement and property keys while the property was sold to a third party. Kumar's non-cooperation with police (failing to produce employment and document details despite notice) and the gravity of charges warranted custodial interrogation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Interim Orders

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: STATE v. MANISH KUMAR (446/2026) Decision: The court rejected Manish Kumar's anticipatory bail application. The judge found the allegations against Kumar serious—involving alleged cheating and fraud in a property transaction worth Rs. 20 lakhs where he allegedly helped facilitate the sale, wrote receipt entries, and later retained the original bayana agreement and property keys while the property was sold to a third party. Kumar's non-cooperation with police (failing to produce employment and document details despite notice) and the gravity of charges warranted custodial interrogation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

District and Sessions Judge, West, THC All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case