Satish Dnyadev Markad vs P I Pathardi Police Station Advocate - APP — 68/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 503. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED / GRANTED AFTER FULL HEARING on 13th March 2026.

Case disposed

Cri.M.A.

CNR: MHAH200003512026

e-Filing Number

05-03-2026

Filing Number

256/2026

Filing Date

06-Mar-2026

Registration No

68/2026

Registration Date

06-Mar-2026

Court

Civil Court Junior Division , Pathardi

Judge

3-Jt. CIVIL Judge J.D. And J.M.F.C. Pathardi

Decision Date

13-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED / GRANTED AFTER FULL HEARING

Last updated 14-Apr-2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 503

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Satish Dnyadev Markad

    Adv. SHINDE PUNJARAM RABHAJI

Respondent(s)

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

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 13-Mar-2026

    Order on ExhibitView PDF

    Summary The court allowed Satish Markad's application for interim custody of his seized Mahindra Scorpio vehicle, rejecting the prosecution's argument that it was needed as trial evidence. The court ordered release of the vehicle on an ₹8 lakh bond with conditions: the applicant cannot sell, mortgage, or alter the vehicle, must produce it on demand, and cannot use it for criminal purposes again. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 13-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Jt. CIVIL Judge J.D. And J.M.F.C. Pathardi

  4. 11-Mar-2026

    Arguments

    Jt. CIVIL Judge J.D. And J.M.F.C. Pathardi

  5. 09-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 06-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 68/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The court allowed Satish Markad's application for interim custody of his seized Mahindra Scorpio vehicle, rejecting the prosecution's argument that it was needed as trial evidence. The court ordered release of the vehicle on an ₹8 lakh bond with conditions: the applicant cannot sell, mortgage, or alter the vehicle, must produce it on demand, and cannot use it for criminal purposes again. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case