The State of Mahrashtra vs Gautam Vasant Jadhav Advocate - Thange S. L. — 281/2022

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 420. Status: Arguments. Next hearing: 16th April 2026.

R.C.C. - Regular Criminal Case

CNR: MHAH250020892022

Arguments

Next Hearing

16th April 2026

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

1367/2022

Filing Date

12-08-2022

Registration No

281/2022

Registration Date

13-08-2022

Court

Civil Court Junior Division ,Parner

Judge

5-Jt. CJJD And JMFC

FIR Details

FIR Number

180

Police Station

PARNER POLICE STATION

Year

2021

Acts & Sections

INDIAN PENAL CODE Section 420

Petitioner(s)

The State of Mahrashtra

Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

Gautam Vasant Jadhav Advocate - Thange S. L.

Hearing History

Judge: 5-Jt. CJJD And JMFC

07-04-2026

Arguments

06-04-2026

Arguments

30-03-2026

Arguments

23-03-2026

Arguments

16-03-2026

Arguments

Interim Orders

18-08-2025
Evidence
25-08-2025
Evidence
30-08-2025
Evidence
17-09-2025
Evidence
17-09-2025
Evidence
22-09-2025
Evidence
08-10-2025
Evidence
08-10-2025
Evidence
13-10-2025
Evidence
27-10-2025
Evidence
27-10-2025
Evidence
27-10-2025
Evidence
27-10-2025
Evidence
27-10-2025
Evidence
27-10-2025
Evidence
27-10-2025
Evidence
27-10-2025
Evidence
27-10-2025
Evidence
27-10-2025
Evidence
27-10-2025
Evidence
27-10-2025
Evidence
27-10-2025
Evidence
01-12-2025
Evidence
01-12-2025
Evidence
08-12-2025
Evidence
05-01-2026
Evidence
16-02-2026
Evidence
23-02-2026
Evidence
02-03-2026
Evidence

The petition is dismissed. The court found no merit in the petitioner's allegations of illegal bank account operations and fraudulent fund transfers. The court held that the petitioner failed to establish sufficient grounds for relief and that the special audit report did not support the claims made, rejecting the plea for intervention against the bank and its staff. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

The petition is dismissed. The court found no merit in the petitioner's allegations of illegal bank account operations and fraudulent fund transfers. The court held that the petitioner failed to establish sufficient grounds for relief and that the special audit report did not support the claims made, rejecting the plea for intervention against the bank and its staff. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

Civil Court Junior Division ,Parner All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case