Pradeep vs state — 165/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483. Disposed: Contested--Bail Refused on 13th March 2026.
Bail Application
CNR: RJMR070004002026
Filing Number
256/2026
Filing Date
10-Mar-2026
Registration No
165/2026
Registration Date
10-Mar-2026
Court
ADJ Nagaur Taluka HQ
Judge
1-Additional DistrictSession judge No.1 nagaur
Decision Date
13-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Bail Refused
Last updated 06-Jun-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
27
Police Station
Police station,Nagaur
Year
2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Pradeep
Adv. SH. MHAVEER VISHNOI
Respondent(s)
-
1.state
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
13-Mar-2026
OrderView PDF
Case Summary: 165/2026 Case: Pradeep v. State of Rajasthan (Bail Application under Section 483, BNSS 2023) Court Decision: The court rejected Pradeep's bail application. The petitioner was arrested on February 3, 2026, under sections 8/21 and 8/29 of the NDPS Act following the seizure of 142.08 grams of MDMA (an illegal narcotic drug) from his possession on January 23, 2026. The court found sufficient prima facie evidence of his involvement in the purchase and sale of illegal drugs, noting his extensive criminal history with 14 prior NDPS-related cases. Given the serious nature of the offense, the commercial quantity of the drug seized, and the petitioner's pattern of repeat offenses, the court held that bail was not warranted. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
13-Mar-2026
Disposed
Additional DistrictSession judge No.1 nagaur
-
11-Mar-2026
Arguments on Applications / Bail Applications / Arguments in Misc. Proceedings
Additional DistrictSession judge No.1 nagaur
-
10-Mar-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
10-Mar-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 165/2026
Case Summary: 165/2026 Case: Pradeep v. State of Rajasthan (Bail Application under Section 483, BNSS 2023) Court Decision: The court rejected Pradeep's bail application. The petitioner was arrested on February 3, 2026, under sections 8/21 and 8/29 of the NDPS Act following the seizure of 142.08 grams of MDMA (an illegal narcotic drug) from his possession on January 23, 2026. The court found sufficient prima facie evidence of his involvement in the purchase and sale of illegal drugs, noting his extensive criminal history with 14 prior NDPS-related cases. Given the serious nature of the offense, the commercial quantity of the drug seized, and the petitioner's pattern of repeat offenses, the court held that bail was not warranted. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts