Sukhveer urf foji vs STATE Advocate - P.P — 150/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483. Disposed: Contested--Bail Granted on 18th March 2026.

Bail Application

CNR: RJJH010004442026

Case disposed

Filing Number

334/2026

Filing Date

10-03-2026

Registration No

150/2026

Registration Date

10-03-2026

Court

DJ ADJ Jhunjhunu District HQ

Judge

1-

Decision Date

18th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Bail Granted

FIR Details

FIR Number

6

Police Station

Police Station Malsisar

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483

Petitioner(s)

Sukhveer urf foji

Adv. Sh. Ramsingh

Respondent(s)

STATE Advocate - P.P

Hearing History

Judge: 1-

18-03-2026

Disposed

16-03-2026

Arguments on Applications / Bail Applications / Arguments in Misc. Proceedings

12-03-2026

Arguments on Applications / Bail Applications / Arguments in Misc. Proceedings

11-03-2026

Arguments on Applications / Bail Applications / Arguments in Misc. Proceedings

Final Orders / Judgements

18-03-2026
Order

Case Summary: 150/2026 The Session Court Jhunjhunu granted bail to Sukhveer alias Foji, who was arrested on 27.02.2026 in connection with a burglary case (FIR 06/2026) involving theft of jewelry, bangles, blankets and currency. While the court noted the accused had eight prior criminal cases, it relied on the Supreme Court precedent (Prabhakar Tiwari v. UP State) that prior criminal history alone cannot justify bail denial. The court observed that co-accused persons had already been granted bail, the trial would take considerable time, and no recovery was made from the accused. Accordingly, the court ordered bail on personal bond of ₹50,000 and two sureties of ₹25,000 each. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: 150/2026 The Session Court Jhunjhunu granted bail to Sukhveer alias Foji, who was arrested on 27.02.2026 in connection with a burglary case (FIR 06/2026) involving theft of jewelry, bangles, blankets and currency. While the court noted the accused had eight prior criminal cases, it relied on the Supreme Court precedent (Prabhakar Tiwari v. UP State) that prior criminal history alone cannot justify bail denial. The court observed that co-accused persons had already been granted bail, the trial would take considerable time, and no recovery was made from the accused. Accordingly, the court ordered bail on personal bond of ₹50,000 and two sureties of ₹25,000 each. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

DJ ADJ Jhunjhunu District HQ All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case