SRICHAND vs State — 65/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483. Disposed: Contested--Bail Granted on 13th March 2026.

Case disposed

Bail Application

CNR: RJAJ290002292026

Filing Number

122/2026

Filing Date

11-Mar-2026

Registration No

65/2026

Registration Date

12-Mar-2026

Court

ADJ NASIRABAD TALUKA

Judge

1-ADJ

Decision Date

13-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Bail Granted

Last updated 07-Jun-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

220

Police Station

Nasirabad Sadar

Year

2021

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SRICHAND

    Adv. FARUKH KHATRI

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.State

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 13-Mar-2026

    JudgementView PDF

    Case Summary: 65/2026 - Srichand v. State Decision: The court GRANTED bail to petitioner Srichand in an NDPS Act case (Sections 8/15, 8/29). The petitioner was arrested following recovery of 10.9 kg of opium powder from a vehicle, but had no direct recovery linked to him and was not involved in the investigation. Key Reasoning: Although the State highlighted the petitioner's prior criminal history (four earlier cases involving assault and NDPS violations), the court found that: (1) no recoverable evidence was seized from the petitioner; (2) investigation is ongoing and trial will take time; and (3) considering the case facts and trial duration, bail was justified. The court imposed conditions: two sureties of ₹25,000 each (one being a close relative) and a personal bond of ₹50,000, with mandatory court appearance at each hearing date. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 13-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    ADJ

  4. 12-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  5. 11-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 65/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: 65/2026 - Srichand v. State Decision: The court GRANTED bail to petitioner Srichand in an NDPS Act case (Sections 8/15, 8/29). The petitioner was arrested following recovery of 10.9 kg of opium powder from a vehicle, but had no direct recovery linked to him and was not involved in the investigation. Key Reasoning: Although the State highlighted the petitioner's prior criminal history (four earlier cases involving assault and NDPS violations), the court found that: (1) no recoverable evidence was seized from the petitioner; (2) investigation is ongoing and trial will take time; and (3) considering the case facts and trial duration, bail was justified. The court imposed conditions: two sureties of ₹25,000 each (one being a close relative) and a personal bond of ₹50,000, with mandatory court appearance at each hearing date. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case