Chan Seok Jung vs State Of Maharashtra Through Bundgarden Police Station etc. Advocate - Bali Sandeep — 1274/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 482. Disposed: Contested--BAIL REFUSED on 02nd April 2026.
Cri.Bail Appln. - Bail Application
CNR: MHPU010029762026
e-Filing Number
07-03-2026
Filing Number
2092/2026
Filing Date
07-03-2026
Registration No
1274/2026
Registration Date
07-03-2026
Court
District and Session Court ,Pune
Judge
17-DISTRICT JUDGE - 1 AND ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE PUNE
Decision Date
02nd April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--BAIL REFUSED
FIR Details
FIR Number
48
Police Station
Bundgarden Police Station
Year
2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Chan Seok Jung
Adv. Ganesh Bhumkar
Respondent(s)
State Of Maharashtra Through Bundgarden Police Station etc. Advocate - Bali Sandeep
BUNDGARDEN POLICE STATION
ECONOMIC OFFENCES WING
Hearing History
Judge: 17-DISTRICT JUDGE - 1 AND ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE PUNE
Disposed
Order
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Argument on Exh.____Unready
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 02-04-2026 | Disposed | |
| 18-03-2026 | Order | |
| 10-03-2026 | Argument on Exh.____Unready | |
| 07-03-2026 | Argument on Exh.____Unready |
Final Orders / Judgements
The court rejected both anticipatory bail applications, finding prima facie evidence of cheating and criminal breach of trust. The judge determined that accused no.1's unilateral cancellation notice and surreptitious transfer of the "CAFE PETER" brand to accused no.2 for an undisclosed consideration demonstrated dishonest intent to deprive the complainant of rights under a valid 2022 transfer agreement, warranting custodial interrogation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
The court rejected both anticipatory bail applications, finding prima facie evidence of cheating and criminal breach of trust. The judge determined that accused no.1's unilateral cancellation notice and surreptitious transfer of the "CAFE PETER" brand to accused no.2 for an undisclosed consideration demonstrated dishonest intent to deprive the complainant of rights under a valid 2022 transfer agreement, warranting custodial interrogation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts