RAVIKUMAR vs PAVAN KUMAR — 402/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section U/S 482. Disposed: Contested--REJECTED on 18th March 2026.
Crl.Misc. - CRIMINAL MISC.CASES
CNR: KAMS010018972026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
401/2026
Filing Date
06-03-2026
Registration No
402/2026
Registration Date
06-03-2026
Court
PRL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, MYSURU
Judge
428-III ADDL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, MYSURU
Decision Date
18th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--REJECTED
FIR Details
FIR Number
10
Police Station
DEVARAJA PS
Year
2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
RAVIKUMAR
Adv. G.K.JOSHI
PAVAN KUMAR
Respondent(s)
PAVAN KUMAR
Hearing History
Judge: 428-III ADDL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, MYSURU
Disposed
ORDERS
ORDERS
ARGUMENTS
OBJECTION
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 18-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 17-03-2026 | ORDERS | |
| 13-03-2026 | ORDERS | |
| 12-03-2026 | ARGUMENTS | |
| 11-03-2026 | OBJECTION |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary: The Mysuru Additional Sessions Court rejected the anticipatory bail petition filed by Ravikumar and Pavan Kumar, who were accused of fraudulently pledging fake gold jewelry at a bank to obtain loans totaling approximately Rs. 56.78 lakhs. The court found prima facie evidence of their involvement in the conspiracy with other accused persons and determined that their interrogation was necessary for the ongoing investigation to trace the fraudulent money and recover the proceeds. The court held that the serious nature of the allegations and the need to prevent tampering with evidence outweighed the petitioners' bail plea. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: The Mysuru Additional Sessions Court rejected the anticipatory bail petition filed by Ravikumar and Pavan Kumar, who were accused of fraudulently pledging fake gold jewelry at a bank to obtain loans totaling approximately Rs. 56.78 lakhs. The court found prima facie evidence of their involvement in the conspiracy with other accused persons and determined that their interrogation was necessary for the ongoing investigation to trace the fraudulent money and recover the proceeds. The court held that the serious nature of the allegations and the need to prevent tampering with evidence outweighed the petitioners' bail plea. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts