Bhausaheb Sopan Sonawane vs M/s Pranav Enterprises Advocate - NIL — 134/2023
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 406,418,34. Disposed: Uncontested--DISPOSED OF OTHERWISE on 02nd April 2026.
R.C.C. - Regular Criminal Case
CNR: MHAH150006762023
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
675/2023
Filing Date
15-04-2023
Registration No
134/2023
Registration Date
18-04-2023
Court
Civil Court Junior Division , Newasa
Judge
2-2nd Jt.Civil Judge JD JMFC Newasa
Decision Date
02nd April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--DISPOSED OF OTHERWISE
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Bhausaheb Sopan Sonawane
Adv. Wagh N. T.
Respondent(s)
M/s Pranav Enterprises Advocate - NIL
Subhash Ramrao Wabale
Adv. NIL
Hearing History
Judge: 2-2nd Jt.Civil Judge JD JMFC Newasa
Disposed
Dismissal Order
Dismissal Order
Dismissal Order
Dismissal Order
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 02-04-2026 | Disposed | |
| 09-03-2026 | Dismissal Order | |
| 27-01-2026 | Dismissal Order | |
| 09-12-2025 | Dismissal Order | |
| 09-10-2025 | Dismissal Order |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary: The Newasa Judicial Magistrate First Class disposed of R.C.C. No. 134/2023 (Bhausaheb Sopan Sonwane v. M/s. Pranav Enterprises & Others) by stopping proceedings and discharging the accused under Bombay High Court's special drive directive. The case, involving offences under IPC sections 409, 405, 406, 418, 463-467, 477(c), had remained stalled for over two years due to continuous absence of the complainant and advocate despite pending summons, making further adjournment futile. Case papers were retained in 'C' file for potential reopening under CrPC Section 300(5). This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: The Newasa Judicial Magistrate First Class disposed of R.C.C. No. 134/2023 (Bhausaheb Sopan Sonwane v. M/s. Pranav Enterprises & Others) by stopping proceedings and discharging the accused under Bombay High Court's special drive directive. The case, involving offences under IPC sections 409, 405, 406, 418, 463-467, 477(c), had remained stalled for over two years due to continuous absence of the complainant and advocate despite pending summons, making further adjournment futile. Case papers were retained in 'C' file for potential reopening under CrPC Section 300(5). This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts