KULDEEP BANJARA vs State — 229/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483. Disposed: Contested--Dismissed after Full Trial/Hearing on 12th March 2026.
Bail Application
CNR: RJAJ010007642026
Filing Number
525/2026
Filing Date
06-03-2026
Registration No
229/2026
Registration Date
06-03-2026
Court
DJ ADJ Ajmer District HQ
Judge
1-District and Sessions Judge
Decision Date
12th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Dismissed after Full Trial/Hearing
FIR Details
FIR Number
101
Police Station
Clock tower
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
KULDEEP BANJARA
Adv. Kailash Chand Sunariwal
Respondent(s)
State
Hearing History
Judge: 1-District and Sessions Judge
Disposed
Compliance
Compliance
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 12-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 10-03-2026 | Compliance |
| 07-03-2026 | Compliance |
Final Orders / Judgements
Court Decision Summary The Session Court, Ajmer rejected bail applications filed by Kuldeep Banjara and Kamlesh Banjara under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita. The court found that the accused were involved in a criminal conspiracy operating an illegal Chit Fund scheme, defrauding multiple victims of approximately ₹4,65,000 and committing criminal breach of trust under IPC sections 318(4), 316(2), and 61(2). The court considered the serious nature of the offense, the accused's criminal history (15 similar pending cases), and their criminal background, concluding that bail at this stage was not warranted. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Court Decision Summary The Session Court, Ajmer rejected bail applications filed by Kuldeep Banjara and Kamlesh Banjara under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita. The court found that the accused were involved in a criminal conspiracy operating an illegal Chit Fund scheme, defrauding multiple victims of approximately ₹4,65,000 and committing criminal breach of trust under IPC sections 318(4), 316(2), and 61(2). The court considered the serious nature of the offense, the accused's criminal history (15 similar pending cases), and their criminal background, concluding that bail at this stage was not warranted. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts