DATTATRAY RAJARAM PATHAK vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS — APPLN/1156/2025

Case under Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.pc) Section 482. Next hearing: 19th June 2026.

CNR: HCBM030129962025

Next Hearing

19th June 2026

e-Filing Number

13-01-2025

Filing Number

APPLN/3088/2025

Filing Date

26-03-2025

Registration No

APPLN/1156/2025

Registration Date

27-03-2025

Judge

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR

Coram

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR

Bench Type

Division

Judicial Branch

Criminal

Acts & Sections

Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.pc) Section 482
Indian Penal Code (I.p.c) Section 420, 465, 471, 474, 500, 501, 384, 34
Information Technology Act, 2000 (Amended 2008) Section 66(D)

Petitioner(s)

DATTATRAY RAJARAM PATHAK

Adv. ZAWARE SUVARNA M.

Respondent(s)

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

Adv. APP For R.Nos.1 and 2.,R.NO.3 IS SERVED. 1123

THE POLICE STATION OFFICER KOTWALI POLICE STATION

ABHIJEET RAJESH KOTHARI

Hearing History

Judge: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR

25-04-2025

FOR ADMISSION - FRESH - CRIMINAL SIDE MATTERS

19-06-2026

DUE ADMISSION -CRIMINAL

27-04-2026

DUE ADMISSION -CRIMINAL

10-04-2026

DUE ADMISSION -CRIMINAL

27-02-2026

DUE ADMISSION -CRIMINAL

Orders

08-05-2026
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR

The High Court of Bombay (Aurangabad Bench) recalled its previous order dated 10.04.2026 in Criminal Application No. 1156/2025 filed by Dattatray Rajaram Pathak against the State of Maharashtra. The recall was necessitated because the mediation referral order was inadvertently passed in this petition due to wrong mentioning by the advocate, when it was intended for another matter. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

The High Court of Bombay (Aurangabad Bench) recalled its previous order dated 10.04.2026 in Criminal Application No. 1156/2025 filed by Dattatray Rajaram Pathak against the State of Maharashtra. The recall was necessitated because the mediation referral order was inadvertently passed in this petition due to wrong mentioning by the advocate, when it was intended for another matter. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Explore other courts

Search Another Case