Shivshankar Bhagat vs State of U.P. — 392/2026

Case under Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act Section 8/20/60. Disposed: Contested--Rejected on 17th March 2026.

Case disposed

Bail Application

CNR: UPCD010008082026

Filing Number

776/2026

Filing Date

27-Feb-2026

Registration No

392/2026

Registration Date

27-Feb-2026

Court

District and Session Judge

Judge

1-District & Session Judge

Decision Date

17-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Rejected

Last updated 22-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

61

Police Station

Chandauli

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act Section 8/20/60

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Shivshankar Bhagat

    Adv. SHRIKANT GUPTA

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.State of U.P.

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 17-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

    Summary The court rejected Shivshankkar Bhagat's bail application in a case involving alleged illegal cannabis trafficking (32.3 kg seized from a taxi on February 19, 2026). The judge found sufficient grounds to deny bail, noting that the applicant was seated in the vehicle where the contraband was recovered and that the quantity far exceeded commercial limits, making the offense serious under the NDPS Act sections 8/20/60. The bail plea was dismissed based on the strength of the prosecution's case and the gravity of the charges. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 17-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    District & Session Judge

  4. 11-Mar-2026

    Hearing

    District & Session Judge

  5. 27-Feb-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 27-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 392/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The court rejected Shivshankkar Bhagat's bail application in a case involving alleged illegal cannabis trafficking (32.3 kg seized from a taxi on February 19, 2026). The judge found sufficient grounds to deny bail, noting that the applicant was seated in the vehicle where the contraband was recovered and that the quantity far exceeded commercial limits, making the offense serious under the NDPS Act sections 8/20/60. The bail plea was dismissed based on the strength of the prosecution's case and the gravity of the charges. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case