PIPYALI URF JAFRU vs State Advocate - APO — 308/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483. Disposed: Contested--Bail Refused on 17th March 2026.
Bail Application
CNR: RJAL010011672026
Filing Number
902/2026
Filing Date
12-03-2026
Registration No
308/2026
Registration Date
12-03-2026
Court
DJ ADJ Alwar District HQ
Judge
1-District And Sessions Judge
Decision Date
17th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Bail Refused
FIR Details
FIR Number
154
Police Station
AKBARPUR
Year
2013
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
PIPYALI URF JAFRU
Adv. AMZAD KHAN
Respondent(s)
State Advocate - APO
Hearing History
Judge: 1-District And Sessions Judge
Disposed
Orders
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 17-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 16-03-2026 | Orders |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: 308/2026 Court Decision: The Session Court at Alwar rejected Pipyali Urf Jafru's second bail petition under Section 483 CrPC on 17.03.2026. The court found that the petitioner, an habitual offender with four prior criminal cases, was charged with hunting a male sambhar deer in the Chilhavala enclave of Tiger Reserve without forest officer permission, in violation of the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972. Given the serious nature of the offense, the petitioner's criminal history, and no material change in case circumstances since the first bail denial, the court held that granting bail would not be justified. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: 308/2026 Court Decision: The Session Court at Alwar rejected Pipyali Urf Jafru's second bail petition under Section 483 CrPC on 17.03.2026. The court found that the petitioner, an habitual offender with four prior criminal cases, was charged with hunting a male sambhar deer in the Chilhavala enclave of Tiger Reserve without forest officer permission, in violation of the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972. Given the serious nature of the offense, the petitioner's criminal history, and no material change in case circumstances since the first bail denial, the court held that granting bail would not be 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