The State of Maharashtra vs Devdan Shrimant Kale Advocate - Khedkar R. N. — 19/2017
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 394,420. Status: Evidence Part Heard. Next hearing: 27th April 2026.
R.C.C. - Reg.Cri.Case
CNR: MHAH200000602017
Next Hearing
27th April 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
44/2017
Filing Date
07-01-2017
Registration No
19/2017
Registration Date
07-01-2017
Court
Civil Court Junior Division , Pathardi
Judge
2-CIVIL JUDGE J.D. AND J.M.F.C PATHARDI
FIR Details
FIR Number
95
Police Station
PATHARDI POLICE STN.PATHARDI
Year
2016
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
The State of Maharashtra
Adv. APP
Omkar Mahanad Dangare
Respondent(s)
Devdan Shrimant Kale Advocate - Khedkar R. N.
Parshuram @ Parsha Vilas Bhosle
Appasaheb Sayaji Navgire
Hearing History
Judge: 2-CIVIL JUDGE J.D. AND J.M.F.C PATHARDI
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 09-03-2026 | Evidence Part Heard | |
| 07-02-2026 | Evidence Part Heard | |
| 17-12-2025 | Evidence Part Heard | |
| 13-11-2025 | Evidence Part Heard | |
| 26-09-2025 | Evidence Part Heard |
Interim Orders
Summary This is a criminal case (FIR 19/2017) involving theft allegations. The court examined a witness (Ganesh Bhausaheb Gale, age 34, farmer) on 13.11.2025 regarding an incident on 03.03.2016 where Rs. 4 lakh was allegedly stolen. The witness's statement was cross-examined by defense counsel for accused 1-2 and accused 3, and the cross-examination was recorded; further investigation was found unnecessary and the statement was accepted by the court. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary This is a criminal case (FIR 19/2017) involving theft allegations. The court examined a witness (Ganesh Bhausaheb Gale, age 34, farmer) on 13.11.2025 regarding an incident on 03.03.2016 where Rs. 4 lakh was allegedly stolen. The witness's statement was cross-examined by defense counsel for accused 1-2 and accused 3, and the cross-examination was recorded; further investigation was found unnecessary and the statement was accepted by the court. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts