Sadiq Khan vs IJOOR PS — 128/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section U/Sec.483. Disposed: Contested--REJECTED on 23rd March 2026.
Crl.Misc. - Criminal MISC. CASES
CNR: KARN010003852026
e-Filing Number
20-02-2026
Filing Number
128/2026
Filing Date
20-02-2026
Registration No
128/2026
Registration Date
21-02-2026
Court
PRL.DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, RAMANAGARA
Judge
812-PRL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE
Decision Date
23rd March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--REJECTED
FIR Details
FIR Number
5
Police Station
IJOOR PS
Year
2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Sadiq Khan
Adv. CHANPASHA
Respondent(s)
IJOOR PS (Police Station)
Hearing History
Judge: 812-PRL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE
Disposed
ORDERS.
BAIL
BAIL
BAIL
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 23-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 16-03-2026 | ORDERS. |
| 13-03-2026 | BAIL |
| 12-03-2026 | BAIL |
| 09-03-2026 | BAIL |
Final Orders / Judgements
SUMMARY OF CASE 128/2026 The Principal District and Sessions Court, Ramanagar, rejected Sadiq Khan's bail application under IPC Section 483. Khan was arrested following a drug enforcement operation on 06.02.2026 where methamphetamine (15.41 grams) and related items were seized from his vehicle. The court found the charges constitute a non-bailable offense involving commercial quantity of drugs, with potential imprisonment of 10-20 years, and determined there was reasonable apprehension that bail would enable evidence tampering and witness intimidation. The bail application was accordingly dismissed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
SUMMARY OF CASE 128/2026 The Principal District and Sessions Court, Ramanagar, rejected Sadiq Khan's bail application under IPC Section 483. Khan was arrested following a drug enforcement operation on 06.02.2026 where methamphetamine (15.41 grams) and related items were seized from his vehicle. The court found the charges constitute a non-bailable offense involving commercial quantity of drugs, with potential imprisonment of 10-20 years, and determined there was reasonable apprehension that bail would enable evidence tampering and witness intimidation. The bail application was accordingly dismissed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts