Ramesh Anand Gosavi vs The State of Maharashtra, Shrirampur City Police Station — 90/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 503. Disposed: Uncontested--REJECTED on 17th March 2026.
Cri.M.A. - Criminal Misc. Application
CNR: MHAH060003052026
e-Filing Number
18-02-2026
Filing Number
305/2026
Filing Date
20-Feb-2026
Registration No
90/2026
Registration Date
21-Feb-2026
Court
Civil Court Junior Division , Shrirampur
Judge
1-Jt.CJJD and JMFC
Decision Date
17-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--REJECTED
Last updated 18-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Ramesh Anand Gosavi
Adv. EJAJ PATHAN
Respondent(s)
-
1.The State of Maharashtra, Shrirampur City Police Station
-
2.Jivandaya Mandal Charitable Trust
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
17-Mar-2026
Order on ExhibitView PDF
The court granted Ramesh Anand Gosavi's petition to recover seized cattle under the Criminal Procedure Code, 2023. The court found that while the petitioner failed to provide documentary proof of ownership, the investigation was at a preliminary stage and the government prosecutor could not establish that the cattle were seized for valid legal reasons. The court determined that the petitioner's status as a transport contractor transporting cattle to slaughter facilities raised suspicions about his actual ownership and intent, making release unjustifiable without stronger evidence of legitimate ownership or proper custody arrangements. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
17-Mar-2026
Disposed
Jt.CJJD and JMFC
-
16-Mar-2026
Order
Jt.CJJD and JMFC
-
11-Mar-2026
Order
Jt.CJJD and JMFC
-
09-Mar-2026
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Jt.CJJD and JMFC
-
05-Mar-2026
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Jt.CJJD and JMFC
-
02-Mar-2026
Reply/Say
Jt.CJJD and JMFC
-
26-Feb-2026
Reply/Say
Jt.CJJD and JMFC
-
23-Feb-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
20-Feb-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 90/2026
The court granted Ramesh Anand Gosavi's petition to recover seized cattle under the Criminal Procedure Code, 2023. The court found that while the petitioner failed to provide documentary proof of ownership, the investigation was at a preliminary stage and the government prosecutor could not establish that the cattle were seized for valid legal reasons. The court determined that the petitioner's status as a transport contractor transporting cattle to slaughter facilities raised suspicions about his actual ownership and intent, making release unjustifiable without stronger evidence of legitimate ownership or proper custody arrangements. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts