State of Maharashtra Through P.S. Telhara vs Sandip Shivaji More Advocate - Khuraniya Dinesh Rameshwarlal — 73/2019
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 306,34. Status: Evidence Part Heard. Next hearing: 04th April 2026.
Sessions Case
CNR: MHAK050008832019
Next Hearing
04th April 2026
Filing Number
543/2019
Filing Date
26-12-2019
Registration No
73/2019
Registration Date
26-12-2019
Court
District and Session Court , Akot
Judge
1-District Judge-1 A.S.J. Akot
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State of Maharashtra Through P.S. Telhara
Adv. A.G.P. /A.P.P
Respondent(s)
Sandip Shivaji More Advocate - Khuraniya Dinesh Rameshwarlal
Maya Sandip More
Adv. Khuraniya Dinesh Rameshwarlal
Puja Rajesh Pawar
Adv. Khuraniya Dinesh Rameshwarlal
Varsha Rajesh Pawar
Adv. Khuraniya Dinesh Rameshwarlal
Hearing History
Judge: 1-District Judge-1 A.S.J. Akot
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 06-03-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
| 04-02-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
| 08-01-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
| 29-11-2025 | Evidence Part Heard |
| 30-10-2025 | Evidence Part Heard |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: In Sessions Case No. 73/2019 (State of Maharashtra vs. Sandip Shivaji More), the Additional Sessions Judge expedited the trial due to the case pending for over 5 years since 2018. The Court directed Telhara Police Station to produce the disputed property (currently at forensic science laboratory) along with the forensic report before the Court, as it is essential to proceed with trial. Meanwhile, the prosecution was permitted to examine available witnesses including inquest panchas and the medical officer who conducted the post-mortem examination. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: In Sessions Case No. 73/2019 (State of Maharashtra vs. Sandip Shivaji More), the Additional Sessions Judge expedited the trial due to the case pending for over 5 years since 2018. The Court directed Telhara Police Station to produce the disputed property (currently at forensic science laboratory) along with the forensic report before the Court, as it is essential to proceed with trial. Meanwhile, the prosecution was permitted to examine available witnesses including inquest panchas and the medical officer who conducted the post-mortem examination. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts