DEEPAK S/O DYANDEV KAMBLE vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA, THR. SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, MUMBAI AND OTHERS — WP/4091/2026
Case under Constitution of India Section 226,227. Next hearing: 30th June 2026.
CNR: HCBM040151702026
Filing Number
WP/10310/2026
Filing Date
30-Apr-2026
Registration No
WP/4091/2026
Registration Date
11-May-2026
Judge
Hon'ble Shri Justice Anil S. Kilor , Hon'ble Shri Justice Raj D. Wakode
Coram
Hon'ble Shri Justice Anil S. Kilor , Hon'ble Shri Justice Raj D. Wakode
Bench Type
Division
Judicial Branch
Civil
Last updated 12-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.DEEPAK S/O DYANDEV KAMBLE
Adv. ANAND NAGORAO SHINDE
Respondent(s)
-
1.STATE OF MAHARASHTRA, THR. SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, MUMBAI AND OTHERS
-
2.THE DIVISIONAL POLICE COMPLAINT AUTHORITY, NAGPUR, THR. CHAIRPERSON
-
3.THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE NAGPUR
-
4.THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, ZONE-1, NAGPUR
-
5.THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE OF NAGPUR (CITY), THR. MOTOR VEHICLE INSPECTOR OFFICER P. K. NAGDEVE
-
6.SHRI. YUVRAJ S/O RAMCHANDRA SURYAWANSHI
Case History
-
30-Jun-2026
Next hearingPending
-
30-Jun-2026
Fresh Admission (Civil Side Matters)
Hon'ble Shri Justice Anil S. Kilor , Hon'ble Shri Justice Raj D. Wakode
-
11-Jun-2026
Hon'ble Shri Justice Anil S. Kilor,hon'ble Shri Justice Raj D. WakodeView PDF
Summary of WP/4091/2026: On 11/06/2026, the High Court of Bombay (Nagpur Bench) heard the writ petition filed by Deepak s/o Dyandev Kamble against the State of Maharashtra and others. The court heard arguments from the petitioner's counsel and adjourned the case, directing the Registry to list the petition before the appropriate bench for further consideration. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
06-Jun-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
30-Apr-2026
Case filed
Registration No. WP/4091/2026
Summary of WP/4091/2026: On 11/06/2026, the High Court of Bombay (Nagpur Bench) heard the writ petition filed by Deepak s/o Dyandev Kamble against the State of Maharashtra and others. The court heard arguments from the petitioner's counsel and adjourned the case, directing the Registry to list the petition before the appropriate bench for further consideration. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts