Swapnil Vilasrao Ambatkar vs State of Maharashtra Advocate - A.P.P. — 672/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED / GRANTED AFTER FULL HEARING on 17th March 2026.
Cri.Bail Appln.
CNR: MHNG010033572026
e-Filing Number
06-03-2026
Filing Number
1503/2026
Filing Date
06-Mar-2026
Registration No
672/2026
Registration Date
06-Mar-2026
Court
District and Session Court , Nagpur
Judge
25-District Judge 6 And Add.Sessions Judge,Nagpur
Decision Date
17-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ALLOWED / GRANTED AFTER FULL HEARING
Last updated 24-May-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
43
Police Station
Dhantoli
Year
2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Swapnil Vilasrao Ambatkar
Adv. Sarnath Sahoo
Respondent(s)
-
1.State of Maharashtra Advocate - A.P.P.
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
17-Mar-2026
Order on ExhibitView PDF
The Special Court NDPS Act, Nagpur granted bail to Swapnil s/o Vilasrao Ambatkar, charged with possession of 4 gms MDMA powder under Sections 8(c) and 22(b) of the NDPS Act. The court found that the quantity was below commercial threshold, there was insufficient direct evidence against the applicant, and prolonged custody was unjustified after 25 days in detention. Bail was granted on a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with surety, subject to conditions including non-tampering with evidence, regular reporting, and court attendance. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
17-Mar-2026
Disposed
District Judge 6 And Add.Sessions Judge,Nagpur
-
13-Mar-2026
Order
District Judge 6 And Add.Sessions Judge,Nagpur
-
12-Mar-2026
Hearing
District Judge 6 And Add.Sessions Judge,Nagpur
-
06-Mar-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
06-Mar-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 672/2026
The Special Court NDPS Act, Nagpur granted bail to Swapnil s/o Vilasrao Ambatkar, charged with possession of 4 gms MDMA powder under Sections 8(c) and 22(b) of the NDPS Act. The court found that the quantity was below commercial threshold, there was insufficient direct evidence against the applicant, and prolonged custody was unjustified after 25 days in detention. Bail was granted on a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with surety, subject to conditions including non-tampering with evidence, regular reporting, and court attendance. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts