PRALHAD S/O SAKHARAM KOLHE SINGHA SAURABH SUJIT, ABHISHEK M. HAJARE vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR PSO SAKHARKHEDA PS DIST BULDHANA — APL/1667/2025

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 528. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 07th May 2026.

Case disposed Next hearing 18-Nov-2025

CNR: HCBM040342802025

e-Filing Number

17-10-2025

Filing Number

APL/9311/2025

Filing Date

03-Nov-2025

Registration No

APL/1667/2025

Registration Date

07-Nov-2025

Judge

Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Vrushali V. Joshi

Coram

Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Vrushali V. Joshi

Bench Type

Division

Category

CRIMINAL ( 9 )

Sub-Category

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

Judicial Branch

Criminal

Decision Date

07-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED

Last updated 28-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 528

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.PRALHAD S/O SAKHARAM KOLHE SINGHA SAURABH SUJIT, ABHISHEK M. HAJARE

  2. 2.SHOBHA W/O PRALHAD KOLHE

    Adv. SINGHA SAURABH SUJIT

  3. 3.SANDIP S/O PRALHAD KOLHE

    Adv. SINGHA SAURABH SUJIT

  4. 4.MANISHA W/O SANDIP KOLHE

    Adv. SINGHA SAURABH SUJIT

  5. 5.MANGALA W/O SANJAY MAHADSANE

    Adv. SINGHA SAURABH SUJIT

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR PSO SAKHARKHEDA PS (Police Station) DIST BULDHANA

    Adv. ,VISHWAJIT S. WANKHADE,BODHIRATAN A. BARTHE,Dr. ADV. MOHAN S. GAWAI,ADV. FOR R2 1123

  2. 2.SMT. VARSHA W/O DEEPAK KOLHE

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 07-May-2026

    Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Vrushali V. JoshiView PDF

    Case Summary: APL/1667/2025 Court Decision: The Nagpur High Court quashed FIR No.236/2025 against the applicants for offences under Sections 498-A, 323, and 506 IPC. Key Reasoning: The court found no specific allegations against the applicants (in-laws and relatives), who were included merely for being related to the husband. Additionally, the FIR was filed on 08.08.2025 for incidents occurring on 15.12.2021—nearly 3.75 years later, constituting inordinate delay beyond the statutory three-year period. The court also noted that documentary evidence contradicted claims that the husband failed to fund their son's medical treatment, as he had paid for surgery and applied under the Rajiv Gandhi Scheme. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 07-May-2026

    Applications For Admission After Notice (Criminal Side Matters)

    Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Vrushali V. Joshi

  4. 30-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Vrushali V. JoshiView PDF

  5. 30-Apr-2026

    Applications For Admission After Notice (Criminal Side Matters)

    Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Vrushali V. Joshi

  6. 23-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Vrushali V. JoshiView PDF

  7. 23-Apr-2026

    Applications For Admission After Notice (Criminal Side Matters)

    Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Vrushali V. Joshi

  8. 17-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Vrushali V. JoshiView PDF

  9. 15-Apr-2026

    Applications For Admission After Notice (Criminal Side Matters)

    Hon'ble Justice Urmila Joshi Phalke

  10. 30-Jan-2026

    Hon'ble Justice Urmila Joshi PhalkeView PDF

  11. 30-Jan-2026

    For Orders - (Criminal Side Matters)

    Hon'ble Justice Urmila Joshi Phalke

  12. 13-Jan-2026

    Hon'ble Justice Urmila Joshi PhalkeView PDF

  13. 13-Jan-2026

    Application For Admission - Fresh - (Criminal Side Matters)

    Hon'ble Justice Urmila Joshi Phalke , Hon'ble Shri Justice Nandesh Shankarrao Deshpande

  14. 18-Nov-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  15. 10-Nov-2025

    Hon'ble Justice Urmila Joshi Phalke,hon'ble Shri Justice Nandesh Shankarrao DeshpandeView PDF

  16. 03-Nov-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. APL/1667/2025

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: APL/1667/2025 Court Decision: The Nagpur High Court quashed FIR No.236/2025 against the applicants for offences under Sections 498-A, 323, and 506 IPC. Key Reasoning: The court found no specific allegations against the applicants (in-laws and relatives), who were included merely for being related to the husband. Additionally, the FIR was filed on 08.08.2025 for incidents occurring on 15.12.2021—nearly 3.75 years later, constituting inordinate delay beyond the statutory three-year period. The court also noted that documentary evidence contradicted claims that the husband failed to fund their son's medical treatment, as he had paid for surgery and applied under the Rajiv Gandhi Scheme. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case