A. Sagubar Sadhik vs Inspector of Police, D3 Podhanur Police Station. — 896/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483. Disposed: Contested--Dismissed on 16th March 2026.
CRLMP - Criminal Miscellaneous Petition
CNR: TNCB010017932026
Filing Number
1242/2026
Filing Date
05-03-2026
Registration No
896/2026
Registration Date
05-03-2026
Court
Principal District Court, Coimbatore
Judge
1-Principal District Judge
Decision Date
16th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Dismissed
FIR Details
FIR Number
64
Police Station
R1 Podanur Police Station
Year
2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
A. Sagubar Sadhik
Adv. Noorul Ameen.H
Respondent(s)
Inspector of Police, D3 Podhanur Police Station.
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Principal District Judge
Disposed
Orders
Orders
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 16-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 12-03-2026 | Orders |
| 09-03-2026 | Orders |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary of Case 896/2026 The court dismissed A. Sagubar Sadhik's bail petition in a case involving alleged illegal online lottery ticket sales. The petitioner was accused under BNS Section 318(4) and Lottery Regulation Act Sections 5 & 7(3), with police claiming recovery of ₹2,46,700 and mobile phones. The Principal District & Sessions Judge denied bail, citing the serious nature of the allegations (including fraud and cheating of public), ongoing investigation by CCB, and the 21-day pre-petition custody period, despite the petitioner's claims of false implication. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary of Case 896/2026 The court dismissed A. Sagubar Sadhik's bail petition in a case involving alleged illegal online lottery ticket sales. The petitioner was accused under BNS Section 318(4) and Lottery Regulation Act Sections 5 & 7(3), with police claiming recovery of ₹2,46,700 and mobile phones. The Principal District & Sessions Judge denied bail, citing the serious nature of the allegations (including fraud and cheating of public), ongoing investigation by CCB, and the 21-day pre-petition custody period, despite the petitioner's claims of false implication. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts