Sumit Nareshappa Gambhire vs State of Maharashtra Through P. S. Telhara Advocate - A.G.P. /A.P.P — 14/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 482. Disposed: Uncontested--REJECTED on 07th March 2026.

Cri.Bail Appln.

CNR: MHAK050000852026

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

13-02-2026

Filing Number

50/2026

Filing Date

16-02-2026

Registration No

14/2026

Registration Date

16-02-2026

Court

District and Session Court , Akot

Judge

1-District Judge-1 A.S.J. Akot

Decision Date

07th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--REJECTED

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 482

Petitioner(s)

Sumit Nareshappa Gambhire

Adv. Rathi Nilesh Ramanlal

Saurabh Nareshappa Gambhire

Adv. Rathi Nilesh Ramanlal

Respondent(s)

State of Maharashtra Through P. S. Telhara Advocate - A.G.P. /A.P.P

Hearing History

Judge: 1-District Judge-1 A.S.J. Akot

07-03-2026

Disposed

06-03-2026

Say / Hearing on Exh____Ready

27-02-2026

Filing of Say on Exh___Unready

25-02-2026

Hearing

23-02-2026

Say / Hearing on Exh____Ready

Final Orders / Judgements

07-03-2026
Order on Exhibit

Summary The court rejected the bail application of Sumit Nareshappa Gambhire and another accused in an e-bike fraud case. The applicants floated a scheme collecting Rs. 12,000 deposits from customers promising e-bikes, but allegedly forged receipts and failed to deliver vehicles. The court found custodial interrogation necessary to investigate the scheme's details, trace money flow, and recover documents, rejecting arguments that the matter was civil in nature or that prior statements rendered interrogation unnecessary. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The court rejected the bail application of Sumit Nareshappa Gambhire and another accused in an e-bike fraud case. The applicants floated a scheme collecting Rs. 12,000 deposits from customers promising e-bikes, but allegedly forged receipts and failed to deliver vehicles. The court found custodial interrogation necessary to investigate the scheme's details, trace money flow, and recover documents, rejecting arguments that the matter was civil in nature or that prior statements rendered interrogation unnecessary. 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

District and Session Court , Akot All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case