AJAY KUMAR(Not Applicable) vs THE STATE OF HP(Not Applicable) — CRMPM/343/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483. Disposed: Contested--Disposed Off on 23rd March 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: HPHC010103052026

Filing Number

CRMPM/1566/2026

Filing Date

09-Mar-2026

Registration No

CRMPM/343/2026

Registration Date

10-Mar-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma

Coram

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma

Bench Type

Single

Judicial Branch

Criminal Section

Decision Date

23-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Disposed Off

Last updated 26-Mar-2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.AJAY KUMAR(Not Applicable)

    Adv. Vijender Katoch,Kapil Sharma,Kapil Sharma, ,Kapil Sharma

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.THE STATE OF HP(Not Applicable)

    Adv. AG 1123

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 23-Mar-2026

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep SharmaView PDF

    Case Summary: CRMPM/343/2026 The Himachal Pradesh High Court granted regular bail to taxi driver Ajay Kumar, arrested under NDPS Act Sections 20 and 29 for alleged involvement in drug trafficking. The court found Kumar was named in the FIR solely based on a co-accused's disclosure statement, which is legally inadmissible under precedent law; notably, no contraband was recovered from Kumar's possession. Bail was granted on Rs. 2,00,000 bond with conditions including court attendance and travel restrictions. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 11-Mar-2026

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep SharmaView PDF

  4. 11-Mar-2026

    Orders

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma

  5. 09-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRMPM/343/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: CRMPM/343/2026 The Himachal Pradesh High Court granted regular bail to taxi driver Ajay Kumar, arrested under NDPS Act Sections 20 and 29 for alleged involvement in drug trafficking. The court found Kumar was named in the FIR solely based on a co-accused's disclosure statement, which is legally inadmissible under precedent law; notably, no contraband was recovered from Kumar's possession. Bail was granted on Rs. 2,00,000 bond with conditions including court attendance and travel restrictions. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case