DILIP KUMAR SAW vs THE STATE OF JHARKHAND Advocate - VINEET KUMAR VASHISTHA — A.B.A./2307/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 18,27(a),28.,29,30,NDPS,ACT,33,IF,ACT. Disposed: Contested--Allowed on 08th May 2026.
CNR: JHHC010126682026
Filing Number
A.B.A./8212/2026
Filing Date
16-Apr-2026
Registration No
A.B.A./2307/2026
Registration Date
27-Apr-2026
Judge
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi
Coram
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi
Bench Type
Single Bench
Category
DRUGS & MEDICINES ( 125 )
Sub-Category
Narcotics Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act 1985 ( 5 )
Judicial Branch
Criminal Section
Decision Date
08-May-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Allowed
Last updated 04-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.DILIP KUMAR SAW
Adv. ABHAY KR CHATURVEDY,RAJESH KR SINGH,RAJESH KR SINGH, ,ASHISH KUMAR SINHA,HADISH ANSARI,RAJESH KR SINGH
-
2.MOHAN GANJHU
Respondent(s)
-
1.THE STATE OF JHARKHAND Advocate - VINEET KUMAR VASHISTHA
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
08-May-2026
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Kumar DwivediView PDF
Case Summary: The Jharkhand High Court granted anticipatory bail to Dilip Kumar Saw and Mohan Ganjhu in connection with Lawalong P.S. Case No.12 of 2026, wherein they were accused of cultivating poppy plants on forest land under NDPS Act and Indian Forest Act provisions. The court found that the land belonged to the Forest Department (not the petitioners), the petitioners had no criminal antecedents, and a co-accused had already been granted anticipatory bail, warranting bail grant. The petitioners were directed to surrender within three weeks and furnish bail bonds of Rs.25,000 each with two sureties. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
08-May-2026
Fresh Filing (Admission)
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi
-
16-Apr-2026
Case filed
Registration No. A.B.A./2307/2026
Case Summary: The Jharkhand High Court granted anticipatory bail to Dilip Kumar Saw and Mohan Ganjhu in connection with Lawalong P.S. Case No.12 of 2026, wherein they were accused of cultivating poppy plants on forest land under NDPS Act and Indian Forest Act provisions. The court found that the land belonged to the Forest Department (not the petitioners), the petitioners had no criminal antecedents, and a co-accused had already been granted anticipatory bail, warranting bail grant. The petitioners were directed to surrender within three weeks and furnish bail bonds of Rs.25,000 each with two sureties. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts