Sachin Vithal Bade vs P I Pathardi Police Station Advocate - APP — 57/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 503. Disposed: Uncontested--ALLOWED / GRANTED AFTER FULL HEARING on 18th March 2026.

Case disposed

Cri.M.A.

CNR: MHAH200002992026

e-Filing Number

27-02-2026

Filing Number

208/2026

Filing Date

27-Feb-2026

Registration No

57/2026

Registration Date

02-Mar-2026

Court

Civil Court Junior Division , Pathardi

Judge

2-CIVIL Judge J.D. And J.M.F.C Pathardi

Decision Date

18-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--ALLOWED / GRANTED AFTER FULL HEARING

Last updated 14-Apr-2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 503

Petitioner(s)

1.Sachin Vithal Bade

Adv. BATULE JAGANNATH TRIMBAK

Respondent(s)

1.P I Pathardi Police Station Advocate - APP (Assistant Public Prosecutor)

Case History

Case disposedDisposed
18-Mar-2026

Order on ExhibitView PDF

The court allowed Sachin Vitthal Bade's application for interim custody of his seized EURO50 tractor, finding him to be the authorized owner entitled to possession. The court imposed conditions including execution of a ₹10,00,000 indemnity bond and production of the vehicle as directed, while noting no confiscation proceedings were initiated and no Mines and Minerals Act charges were filed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
18-Mar-2026

Disposed

CIVIL Judge J.D. And J.M.F.C Pathardi
16-Mar-2026

Arguments

CIVIL Judge J.D. And J.M.F.C Pathardi
12-Mar-2026

W.S. and Say

CIVIL Judge J.D. And J.M.F.C Pathardi
09-Mar-2026

W.S. and Say

CIVIL Judge J.D. And J.M.F.C Pathardi
05-Mar-2026

First hearing

Initial hearing scheduled
27-Feb-2026

Case filed

Registration No. 57/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The court allowed Sachin Vitthal Bade's application for interim custody of his seized EURO50 tractor, finding him to be the authorized owner entitled to possession. The court imposed conditions including execution of a ₹10,00,000 indemnity bond and production of the vehicle as directed, while noting no confiscation proceedings were initiated and no Mines and Minerals Act charges were filed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.