RAMBAGAT vs State Advocate - ADPP — 72/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483. Disposed: Contested--Bail Granted on 19th March 2026.

Case disposed

Bail Application

CNR: RJKT100001692026

Filing Number

125/2026

Filing Date

18-Mar-2026

Registration No

72/2026

Registration Date

18-Mar-2026

Court

ADJ Ramganjmandi Taluka

Judge

1-Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ramganjmandi

Decision Date

19-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Bail Granted

Last updated 21-Jun-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

84

Police Station

RAMGANJ MANDI

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.RAMBAGAT

    Adv. KAMLESH KUMAR

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.State Advocate - ADPP

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 19-Mar-2026

    Order

    Case 72/2026 Summary RAMBAGAT v. State Advocate - ADPP The court GRANTED bail to petitioner Rambagat under Section 483 of the Indian Code of Criminal Procedure. Rambagat was arrested for alleged illegal gambling (betting/satta) under Sections 13 of RPDO and 112 BNS, with ₹8,690 cash and lottery documents seized. The court found that while investigation was pending, the petitioner had no criminal convictions, maintained a permanent residence, showed no flight risk, and remained partially investigated; bail was granted upon furnishing two sureties of ₹25,000 each plus ₹50,000 personal bond. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 19-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ramganjmandi

  4. 18-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  5. 18-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 72/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case 72/2026 Summary RAMBAGAT v. State Advocate - ADPP The court GRANTED bail to petitioner Rambagat under Section 483 of the Indian Code of Criminal Procedure. Rambagat was arrested for alleged illegal gambling (betting/satta) under Sections 13 of RPDO and 112 BNS, with ₹8,690 cash and lottery documents seized. The court found that while investigation was pending, the petitioner had no criminal convictions, maintained a permanent residence, showed no flight risk, and remained partially investigated; bail was granted upon furnishing two sureties of ₹25,000 each plus ₹50,000 personal bond. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case