STATE vs MUNIP MAHTO AND ANR — 250/2025
Case under Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act 1985 Section 20,29. Status: Misc./ Appearance. Next hearing: 20th July 2026.
SC - SESSIONS CASE
CNR: DLWT010053672025
Next Hearing
20th July 2026
Filing Number
1740/2025
Filing Date
29-05-2025
Registration No
250/2025
Registration Date
29-05-2025
Court
District and Sessions Judge, West, THC
Judge
156-Special Judge
FIR Details
FIR Number
246
Police Station
Crime Branch-West Delhi
Year
2024
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
STATE
Adv. xyz
Respondent(s)
MUNIP MAHTO AND ANR
BALJEET KUMAR
GAGAN GAURAV @ MUNNA
Hearing History
Judge: 156-Special Judge
Misc./ Appearance
For Bail
Misc./ Appearance
For Bail
Prosecution Evidence
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 02-06-2026 | Misc./ Appearance |
| 01-06-2026 | For Bail |
| 21-05-2026 | Misc./ Appearance |
| 04-05-2026 | For Bail |
| 23-04-2026 | Prosecution Evidence |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: SC 250/2025 - STATE v. MUNIP MAHTO AND ANR Outcome: Bail Application DISMISSED Accused Baljeet Kumar's bail application under Section 483 BNSS was dismissed on June 2, 2026. The court found that 58.52 kg of ganja (commercial quantity) was recovered during a courier interception operation, with a fake Aadhar card bearing the applicant's photograph used to receive the consignment. The court rejected bail despite the applicant's claims of false implication, citing serious NDPS charges, previous conviction under IPC Section 302, risk of evidence tampering, witness intimidation, and flight risk. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: SC 250/2025 - STATE v. MUNIP MAHTO AND ANR Outcome: Bail Application DISMISSED Accused Baljeet Kumar's bail application under Section 483 BNSS was dismissed on June 2, 2026. The court found that 58.52 kg of ganja (commercial quantity) was recovered during a courier interception operation, with a fake Aadhar card bearing the applicant's photograph used to receive the consignment. The court rejected bail despite the applicant's claims of false implication, citing serious NDPS charges, previous conviction under IPC Section 302, risk of evidence tampering, witness intimidation, and flight risk. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts