RANGASWAMY.T - PUTTA vs CHITRALLI GATE PS — 268/2026

Case under Code of Criminal Procedure Section 439,(1)(b). Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED/GRANTED AFTER FULL HEARING on 18th March 2026.

Case disposed

Crl.Misc. - CRIMINAL MISC.CASES

CNR: KACD010010332026

Filing Number

273/2026

Filing Date

09-Mar-2026

Registration No

268/2026

Registration Date

09-Mar-2026

Court

PRL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT, CHITRADURGA

Judge

228-Prl. District And Sessions Judge

Decision Date

18-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED/GRANTED AFTER FULL HEARING

Last updated 20-Jun-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

158

Police Station

CHITRALLI GATE PS

Year

2023

Acts & Sections

Code of Criminal Procedure Section 439,(1)(b)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.RANGASWAMY.T - PUTTA

    Adv. R. MAHANTHESHA

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.CHITRALLI GATE PS (Police Station)

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 18-Mar-2026

    Orders

    Case Summary: Rangaswamy.T @ Putta v. State (Crl.Mis.268/2026) The court allowed the petitioner's request to modify bail conditions imposed in November 2025 for theft and forest act violations. The petitioner, who failed to appear before the jurisdictional court within the original one-month deadline, was granted a 20-day extension to appear, contingent on paying Rs. 3,000 penalty in each case, with warning that further breaches would forfeit bail benefits. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 18-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Prl. District And Sessions Judge

  4. 16-Mar-2026

    Orders

    Prl. District And Sessions Judge

  5. 13-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 09-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 268/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: Rangaswamy.T @ Putta v. State (Crl.Mis.268/2026) The court allowed the petitioner's request to modify bail conditions imposed in November 2025 for theft and forest act violations. The petitioner, who failed to appear before the jurisdictional court within the original one-month deadline, was granted a 20-day extension to appear, contingent on paying Rs. 3,000 penalty in each case, with warning that further breaches would forfeit bail benefits. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case