Motilal vs State Advocate - Public Prosecutor — 113/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483,. Disposed: Contested--Bail Refused on 10th March 2026.
Bail Application
CNR: RJBD010004772026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
370/2026
Filing Date
06-03-2026
Registration No
113/2026
Registration Date
06-03-2026
Court
DJ ADJ Bundi HQ
Judge
4-ADJ II
Decision Date
10th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Bail Refused
FIR Details
FIR Number
428
Police Station
Hindoli
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Motilal
Adv. Jitendra Kumar Jain
Respondent(s)
State Advocate - Public Prosecutor
Hearing History
Judge: 4-ADJ II
Disposed
Arguments on Applications / Bail Applications / Arguments in Misc. Proceedings
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 10-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 07-03-2026 | Arguments on Applications / Bail Applications / Arguments in Misc. Proceedings |
Final Orders / Judgements
The Additional Sessions Court, Bundi, rejected the bail application of Moti Lal under Section 483 BNS filed by the accused charged with serious offenses including criminal intimidation, wrongful restraint, and voluntarily causing hurt with a weapon (Sections 115(2), 333, 109(2), 352, and 118(2) IPC). The court found that the chargesheet had been filed against the accused for allegedly severely assaulting a woman with a knife on multiple occasions while intoxicated, and that these grave and violent charges warranted continued custody rather than bail release. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The Additional Sessions Court, Bundi, rejected the bail application of Moti Lal under Section 483 BNS filed by the accused charged with serious offenses including criminal intimidation, wrongful restraint, and voluntarily causing hurt with a weapon (Sections 115(2), 333, 109(2), 352, and 118(2) IPC). The court found that the chargesheet had been filed against the accused for allegedly severely assaulting a woman with a knife on multiple occasions while intoxicated, and that these grave and violent charges warranted continued custody rather than bail release. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts