NITIKA RAO vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR — WP/682/2026

Case under Constitution of India Section 226. Next hearing: 05th May 2026.

CNR: HCBM010066802026

Next Hearing

05th May 2026

Filing Number

WP/2842/2026

Filing Date

07-02-2026

Registration No

WP/682/2026

Registration Date

10-02-2026

Judge

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ASHWIN D. BHOBE

Coram

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ASHWIN D. BHOBE

Bench Type

Single

Category

CRIMINAL ( 9 )

Sub-Category

QUASHING OF FIR C.R., CHARGE SHEET OR PROSECUTION ( 26 )

Judicial Branch

Criminal

Acts & Sections

Constitution of India Section 226
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 528
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 308(2),352,351
The Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribes(prevention of Atrocities) Act Section 3(1),3(1)s,3(1)

Petitioner(s)

NITIKA RAO

Adv. Jyotiram S Yadav

Respondent(s)

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR

BHARAT VASANT BODADE

Hearing History

Judge: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ASHWIN D. BHOBE

17-02-2026

FOR ADMISSION

05-05-2026

FOR ADMISSION

17-04-2026

FOR ADMISSION

15-04-2026

FOR ADMISSION

09-12-2026

FOR ADMISSION

Orders

17-04-2026
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ASHWIN D. BHOBE

Case Summary In Writ Petition No. 682 of 2026, the High Court of Bombay adjourned the matter to 05.05.2026 by consent of parties. The petitioner Nitika Rao and respondent No. 2 sought quashing of criminal proceedings (under SC/ST Act) based on settlement, but the court deferred decision after learning that a proclamation under Section 82 CrPC had been issued against the petitioner, allowing time for appropriate steps to be taken. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary In Writ Petition No. 682 of 2026, the High Court of Bombay adjourned the matter to 05.05.2026 by consent of parties. The petitioner Nitika Rao and respondent No. 2 sought quashing of criminal proceedings (under SC/ST Act) based on settlement, but the court deferred decision after learning that a proclamation under Section 82 CrPC had been issued against the petitioner, allowing time for appropriate steps to be taken. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Explore other courts

Search Another Case