MAHAVEER SINGH URF GULLU S/O PANCHU SINGH vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN — CRLMB/8740/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 16th June 2026.
CNR: RJHC020541302026
e-Filing Number
01-06-2026
Filing Number
CRLMB/22592/2026
Filing Date
02-Jun-2026
Registration No
CRLMB/8740/2026
Registration Date
03-Jun-2026
Judge
Ravi Chirania (V.j.)
Coram
Ravi Chirania (V.j.)
Bench Type
Single Bench
Category
Bail Applications under Section 439 CrPC ( 202 )
Judicial Branch
CRIMINAL
Decision Date
16-Jun-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ALLOWED
Last updated 17-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.MAHAVEER SINGH URF GULLU S/O PANCHU SINGH
Adv. AAYUSH AGARWAL
-
2.DEEPAK SINGH S/O MOHAN SINGH
Respondent(s)
-
1.STATE OF RAJASTHAN
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
16-Jun-2026
Ravi Chirania (V.j.)View PDF
CASE SUMMARY: CRLMB/8740/2026 The Rajasthan High Court allowed bail applications filed by seven accused persons (Mahaveer Singh, Deepak Singh, and five others) arrested for allegedly stealing articles from Power Grid Corporation's office under Section 303(2) BNS, 2023. The court granted bail after finding that stolen articles were recovered, investigation was complete, and the accused had no criminal antecedents. Each accused was directed to furnish a personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000 with two sureties of Rs. 50,000 each. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
16-Jun-2026
For Orders (439 Cr.p.c./483 Bnss)
-
02-Jun-2026
Case filed
Registration No. CRLMB/8740/2026
CASE SUMMARY: CRLMB/8740/2026 The Rajasthan High Court allowed bail applications filed by seven accused persons (Mahaveer Singh, Deepak Singh, and five others) arrested for allegedly stealing articles from Power Grid Corporation's office under Section 303(2) BNS, 2023. The court granted bail after finding that stolen articles were recovered, investigation was complete, and the accused had no criminal antecedents. Each accused was directed to furnish a personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000 with two sureties of Rs. 50,000 each. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts