PUSHPENDRA KUMAR NAVAL vs State — 246/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483. Disposed: Contested--Bail Refused on 12th March 2026.

Case disposed

Bail Application

CNR: RJAJ010008252026

Filing Number

581/2026

Filing Date

06-Mar-2026

Registration No

246/2026

Registration Date

06-Mar-2026

Court

DJ ADJ Ajmer District HQ

Judge

2-Addl District and Sessions Judge I

Decision Date

12-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Bail Refused

Last updated 02-Apr-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

156

Police Station

Civil Lines

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.PUSHPENDRA KUMAR NAVAL

    Adv. Ajay Kumar Verma 1

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.State

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 12-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

    Summary The Additional Sessions Court in Ajmer rejected the second bail application of Pushpendra Kumar Navel, accused of forging power of attorney documents and fraudulently transferring agricultural land worth ₹75 lakh through fake signatures of deceased and other co-owners. The court found the charges to be of serious nature, noting that the accused has a similar pending case (386/19) under forgery sections, and deemed bail inappropriate without detailed examination of merits, affirming the earlier rejections by the trial court and High Court. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 12-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Addl District and Sessions Judge I

  4. 11-Mar-2026

    Compliance

    Addl District and Sessions Judge I

  5. 10-Mar-2026

    Compliance

    Addl District and Sessions Judge I

  6. 09-Mar-2026

    Compliance

    Addl District and Sessions Judge I

  7. 07-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  8. 06-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 246/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The Additional Sessions Court in Ajmer rejected the second bail application of Pushpendra Kumar Navel, accused of forging power of attorney documents and fraudulently transferring agricultural land worth ₹75 lakh through fake signatures of deceased and other co-owners. The court found the charges to be of serious nature, noting that the accused has a similar pending case (386/19) under forgery sections, and deemed bail inappropriate without detailed examination of merits, affirming the earlier rejections by the trial court and High Court. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case