State of Maharashtra Through P.S.O. P.S. GRP Akola. vs Biku Abraham Mandal — 78/2025
Case under Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act Section 20(b),ii(c),29. Status: Argument on Exh.____Unready. Next hearing: 15th April 2026.
NDPS. S. Case
CNR: MHAK010014492025
Next Hearing
15th April 2026
Filing Number
632/2025
Filing Date
23-04-2025
Registration No
78/2025
Registration Date
24-04-2025
Court
District and Session Court , Akola
Judge
5-Adhoc District Judge I Akola
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State of Maharashtra Through P.S.O. P.S. GRP Akola.
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
Biku Abraham Mandal
Sushant alias Shrikant Parshuram Nayak
Hearing History
Judge: 5-Adhoc District Judge I Akola
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Argument on Exh.____Unready
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 12-03-2026 | Argument on Exh.____Unready |
| 06-03-2026 | Argument on Exh.____Unready |
| 18-02-2026 | Argument on Exh.____Unready |
| 13-02-2026 | Argument on Exh.____Unready |
| 21-01-2026 | Argument on Exh.____Unready |
Interim Orders
SUMMARY Biku Abraham Mandal's bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 was rejected. The Additional Sessions Judge found prima facie evidence that the applicant was involved in possessing commercial quantity ganja (24.700 gm, worth Rs. 3,70,000), charged under NDPS Act Sections 20(b)(ii)(c) and 29, and rejected the parity argument with a co-accused who had been granted bail by the High Court, distinguishing the present applicant's direct possession of the contraband. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
SUMMARY Biku Abraham Mandal's bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 was rejected. The Additional Sessions Judge found prima facie evidence that the applicant was involved in possessing commercial quantity ganja (24.700 gm, worth Rs. 3,70,000), charged under NDPS Act Sections 20(b)(ii)(c) and 29, and rejected the parity argument with a co-accused who had been granted bail by the High Court, distinguishing the present applicant's direct possession of the contraband. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts