Ajay kumar vs state — 156/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483. Disposed: Contested--Bail Refused on 12th March 2026.

Case disposed

Bail Application

CNR: RJSG010004662026

Filing Number

376/2026

Filing Date

12-Mar-2026

Registration No

156/2026

Registration Date

12-Mar-2026

Court

DJ ADJ Shri Ganganagar District HQ

Judge

2-ADJ I

Decision Date

12-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Bail Refused

Last updated 27-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

381

Police Station

Jawahar Nagar Police Station,Sri Ganganagar

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Ajay kumar

    Adv. Mukesh Kumar 1

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.state

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 12-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

    Case Summary: Ajay Kumar v. State (156/2026) The court rejected Ajay Kumar's second bail application under Section 483 BNS. Kumar, charged with theft and related offenses under Sections 303(2), 317(4), and 61(2)(a) BNS, has an extensive criminal history with 18 pending cases, predominantly theft-related. The judge found Kumar to be a habitual offender and determined that granting bail would pose a public safety risk, noting the escalating pattern of theft incidents in the area. Despite other accused receiving bail, the court distinguished Kumar's case based on his criminal profile and activities. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 12-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  4. 12-Mar-2026

    Restored

    ADJ I

  5. 12-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    ADJ I

  6. 12-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 156/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: Ajay Kumar v. State (156/2026) The court rejected Ajay Kumar's second bail application under Section 483 BNS. Kumar, charged with theft and related offenses under Sections 303(2), 317(4), and 61(2)(a) BNS, has an extensive criminal history with 18 pending cases, predominantly theft-related. The judge found Kumar to be a habitual offender and determined that granting bail would pose a public safety risk, noting the escalating pattern of theft incidents in the area. Despite other accused receiving bail, the court distinguished Kumar's case based on his criminal profile and activities. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case