parmveer soni vs State — 275/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483. Disposed: Contested--Bail Refused on 19th March 2026.
Bail Application
CNR: RJAJ010009822026
Filing Number
707/2026
Filing Date
12-03-2026
Registration No
275/2026
Registration Date
12-03-2026
Court
DJ ADJ Ajmer District HQ
Judge
3-Addl District and Sessions Judge II
Decision Date
19th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Bail Refused
FIR Details
FIR Number
97
Police Station
Hari Bhau Upadhyaya
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
parmveer soni
Adv. Krishan Gopal Khatri
Respondent(s)
State
Hearing History
Judge: 3-Addl District and Sessions Judge II
Disposed
Arguments on Applications / Bail Applications / Arguments in Misc. Proceedings
Arguments on Applications / Bail Applications / Arguments in Misc. Proceedings
Arguments on Applications / Bail Applications / Arguments in Misc. Proceedings
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 19-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 18-03-2026 | Arguments on Applications / Bail Applications / Arguments in Misc. Proceedings |
| 17-03-2026 | Arguments on Applications / Bail Applications / Arguments in Misc. Proceedings |
| 13-03-2026 | Arguments on Applications / Bail Applications / Arguments in Misc. Proceedings |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: 275/2026 - Parmveer Soni v. State Decision: The Additional Session Judge rejected Parmveer Soni's bail application on March 19, 2026. The court found substantial evidence that the petitioner, along with co-accused, committed serious assault in a land dispute, causing grievous injuries including amputation of the victim's limb. Given the severity of charges under BNS sections 115(2), 109(1), 303(2), 324(4)(5), 189(2), 111(2), and 61(2), the court determined bail was not justified. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: 275/2026 - Parmveer Soni v. State Decision: The Additional Session Judge rejected Parmveer Soni's bail application on March 19, 2026. The court found substantial evidence that the petitioner, along with co-accused, committed serious assault in a land dispute, causing grievous injuries including amputation of the victim's limb. Given the severity of charges under BNS sections 115(2), 109(1), 303(2), 324(4)(5), 189(2), 111(2), and 61(2), the court determined bail was not justified. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts