Deepakumar vs Inspector of Police, RS Puram Police Station — 967/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483. Disposed: Contested--Dismissed on 16th March 2026.

Case disposed

CRLMP - Criminal Miscellaneous Petition

CNR: TNCB010019502026

Filing Number

1344/2026

Filing Date

11-Mar-2026

Registration No

967/2026

Registration Date

11-Mar-2026

Court

Principal District Court, Coimbatore

Judge

1-Principal District Judge

Decision Date

16-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Dismissed

Last updated 14-Jun-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

80

Police Station

B2 R.S.Puram Police Station

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Deepakumar

    Adv. RAJARAM M

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Inspector of Police, RS Puram Police Station

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 16-Mar-2026

    Copy of OrderView PDF

    Case Summary: 967/2026 The Principal District & Sessions Judge, Coimbatore rejected Deepakumar's bail petition in an NDPS Act drug possession case. Deepakumar (accused no.3) was charged with possessing 200 grams of hemp and prescription tablets allegedly intended for sale; his counsel argued he was falsely implicated based solely on co-accused confessions with no direct recovery linking him. The court dismissed the petition, citing the serious nature of the offence, quantity of contraband recovered, recent arrest, and preliminary investigation stage, determining bail would prejudice ongoing investigations. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 16-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Principal District Judge

  4. 11-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 967/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: 967/2026 The Principal District & Sessions Judge, Coimbatore rejected Deepakumar's bail petition in an NDPS Act drug possession case. Deepakumar (accused no.3) was charged with possessing 200 grams of hemp and prescription tablets allegedly intended for sale; his counsel argued he was falsely implicated based solely on co-accused confessions with no direct recovery linking him. The court dismissed the petition, citing the serious nature of the offence, quantity of contraband recovered, recent arrest, and preliminary investigation stage, determining bail would prejudice ongoing investigations. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case