RAMESH vs THE STATE — CRL.P/200476/2026

Case under Indian Penal Code1 Section 420, 465, 468,471,120(B). Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 09th April 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: KAHC030040682026

Filing Number

CRL.P/200504/2026

Filing Date

02-Apr-2026

Registration No

CRL.P/200476/2026

Registration Date

04-Apr-2026

Judge

G Basavaraja

Coram

G Basavaraja

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

CRL.P ( 112 )

Sub-Category

438(Cr.PC)/482(BNSS)-U/S 438/-U/S 482 ( 6 )

Judicial Branch

Judicial Section

Decision Date

09-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED

Last updated 11-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Indian Penal Code1 Section 420, 465, 468,471,120(B)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.RAMESH

    Adv. AVINASH A UPLAONKAR

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.THE STATE

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 09-Apr-2026

    G BasavarajaView PDF

    Summary The Karnataka High Court allowed the bail petition of Ramesh S/O Nagappa Talwar, accused of cheating, forgery, and criminal conspiracy (IPC Sections 420, 465, 468, 471, and 120(B)). The court granted bail on the principle of parity, noting that the District Sessions Judge had previously granted anticipatory bail in similar cases, though the trial court had rejected his application. The petitioner must execute a personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000 with one surety and comply with conditions including non-interference with witnesses and abstaining from similar offences. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 09-Apr-2026

    Orders -1St Time Matters

    G Basavaraja

  4. 06-Apr-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  5. 02-Apr-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRL.P/200476/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The Karnataka High Court allowed the bail petition of Ramesh S/O Nagappa Talwar, accused of cheating, forgery, and criminal conspiracy (IPC Sections 420, 465, 468, 471, and 120(B)). The court granted bail on the principle of parity, noting that the District Sessions Judge had previously granted anticipatory bail in similar cases, though the trial court had rejected his application. The petitioner must execute a personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000 with one surety and comply with conditions including non-interference with witnesses and abstaining from similar offences. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case