Lavesh Rajendra Kopardar vs State of Maharashtra through Poynad Police Station — 25/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483. Disposed: Uncontested--BAIL GRANTED on 09th March 2026.

Cri.Bail Appln. - Bail Application

CNR: MHRG010002142026

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

27-02-2026

Filing Number

73/2026

Filing Date

27-02-2026

Registration No

25/2026

Registration Date

27-02-2026

Court

District and Session Court Raigad

Judge

16-DISTRICT JUDGE-3 AND ADDL.SESSIONS JUDGE

Decision Date

09th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--BAIL GRANTED

FIR Details

FIR Number

21

Police Station

Poynad Police Station

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483

Petitioner(s)

Lavesh Rajendra Kopardar

Adv. Ankit Bangera

Respondent(s)

State of Maharashtra through Poynad Police Station

Hearing History

Judge: 16-DISTRICT JUDGE-3 AND ADDL.SESSIONS JUDGE

09-03-2026

Disposed

05-03-2026

Reply/Say

02-03-2026

Reply/Say

27-02-2026

Reply/Say

Final Orders / Judgements

09-03-2026
Order on Exhibit

Summary The court granted bail to applicant Lavesh Rajendra Kopardar in a case involving extortion and attempted murder at a resort. While the FIR describes serious allegations including armed intimidation and firearm use, the court found that the most serious overt acts—drawing a pistol and attempting to fire it—were specifically attributed only to the principal accused, not the applicant. The court reasoned that the applicant's limited role (accompanying the principal accused), one month of custody already served, and lack of necessity for further custodial interrogation warranted bail with conditions including a Rs.1 lakh bond and weekly police reporting for three months. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The court granted bail to applicant Lavesh Rajendra Kopardar in a case involving extortion and attempted murder at a resort. While the FIR describes serious allegations including armed intimidation and firearm use, the court found that the most serious overt acts—drawing a pistol and attempting to fire it—were specifically attributed only to the principal accused, not the applicant. The court reasoned that the applicant's limited role (accompanying the principal accused), one month of custody already served, and lack of necessity for further custodial interrogation warranted bail with conditions including a Rs.1 lakh bond and weekly police reporting for three months. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

District and Session Court Raigad All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case