SHALIGRAM S/O VITTAHL CHORE vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR PSO., SONALA, TAL. KHAMGAON, DIST. BULDHANA AND ANR — ABA/424/2026
Case under Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.pc) Section 438. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED OFF on 11th June 2026.
CNR: HCBM040168682026
Next Hearing
26th May 2026
Filing Number
ABA/5355/2026
Filing Date
21-05-2026
Registration No
ABA/424/2026
Registration Date
25-05-2026
Judge
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRAVIN S. PATIL
Coram
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRAVIN S. PATIL
Bench Type
Single
Category
CRIMINAL ( 9 )
Sub-Category
ANTICIPATORY BAIL ( 4 )
Judicial Branch
Criminal
Decision Date
11th June 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISPOSED OFF
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
SHALIGRAM S/O VITTAHL CHORE
Adv. V.T. SURYAWANSHI,NUTAN JANARDHAN KOLHE,NUTAN JANARDHAN KOLHE, ,NUTAN JANARDHAN KOLHE
Respondent(s)
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR PSO., SONALA, TAL. KHAMGAON, DIST. BULDHANA AND ANR
PRALHAD S/O TULSHIRAM CHORE
Hearing History
Judge: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRAVIN S. PATIL
ABA (AFTER NOTICE)
ABA (FRESH)
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 26-05-2026 | |
| 11-06-2026 | ABA (AFTER NOTICE) |
| 08-06-2026 | ABA (FRESH) |
Orders
Case Summary: ABA/424/2026 The High Court of Bombay (Nagpur Bench) granted pre-arrest bail to Shaligram in a criminal case involving charges of cheating, forgery, and using forged documents (IPC Sections 420, 468, 471), finding that custody was unnecessary since the applicant had already cooperated with police and produced available documents. The court confirmed its interim protection order, noting that the dispute arose from a property mutation entry already set aside by revenue authorities and a pending civil partition suit where the complainant had not even claimed interest in the contested plot, indicating this was essentially a civil/revenue dispute between relatives rather than a criminal matter warranting custody. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: ABA/424/2026 The High Court of Bombay (Nagpur Bench) granted pre-arrest bail to Shaligram in a criminal case involving charges of cheating, forgery, and using forged documents (IPC Sections 420, 468, 471), finding that custody was unnecessary since the applicant had already cooperated with police and produced available documents. The court confirmed its interim protection order, noting that the dispute arose from a property mutation entry already set aside by revenue authorities and a pending civil partition suit where the complainant had not even claimed interest in the contested plot, indicating this was essentially a civil/revenue dispute between relatives rather than a criminal matter warranting custody. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts