Dhanraj etc vs state — 68/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483. Disposed: Contested--Bail Granted on 19th March 2026.
Bail Application
CNR: RJMR010001812026
Filing Number
127/2026
Filing Date
09-03-2026
Registration No
68/2026
Registration Date
09-03-2026
Court
DJ Merta District HQ
Judge
1-District and Sessions Judge, Merta
Decision Date
19th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Bail Granted
FIR Details
FIR Number
21
Police Station
Merta Road
Year
2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Dhanraj etc
Adv. Sh. Suresh Choudhary
Respondent(s)
state
Hearing History
Judge: 1-District and Sessions Judge, Merta
Disposed
Orders
Orders
Orders
Orders
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 19-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 18-03-2026 | Orders |
| 17-03-2026 | Orders |
| 16-03-2026 | Orders |
| 13-03-2026 | Orders |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary - 68/2026 The Medta Sessions Court granted bail to petitioners Dhanraj and Ramniwas in an NDPS Act case (FIR 21/2026) under Section 483 CrPC. While 160 grams of heroin was allegedly recovered from co-accused Bablu, no contraband was recovered from the petitioners themselves, and they were not arrested at the scene. The court relied on the Supreme Court's *Tufan Singh v. State of Tamil Nadu* precedent, holding that accusations based solely on the main accused's disclosure statement cannot constitute reliable trial evidence without corroborating proof. With investigation completed and no prior convictions substantiated, the court found bail justified. Conditions: Each petitioner must furnish a personal bond of ₹1,00,000 and two sureties of ₹50,000 each, with regular court attendance required. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary - 68/2026 The Medta Sessions Court granted bail to petitioners Dhanraj and Ramniwas in an NDPS Act case (FIR 21/2026) under Section 483 CrPC. While 160 grams of heroin was allegedly recovered from co-accused Bablu, no contraband was recovered from the petitioners themselves, and they were not arrested at the scene. The court relied on the Supreme Court's *Tufan Singh v. State of Tamil Nadu* precedent, holding that accusations based solely on the main accused's disclosure statement cannot constitute reliable trial evidence without corroborating proof. With investigation completed and no prior convictions substantiated, the court found bail justified. Conditions: Each petitioner must furnish a personal bond of ₹1,00,000 and two sureties of ₹50,000 each, with regular court attendance required. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts