Satish Machhindra Nage vs The State of Maharashtra — 926/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 503. Disposed: Uncontested--ALLOWED OTHERWISE on 23rd March 2026.

Case disposed

Cri.M.A. - Criminal Misc. Application

CNR: MHAU030052152026

e-Filing Number

04-03-2026

Filing Number

5215/2026

Filing Date

05-Mar-2026

Registration No

926/2026

Registration Date

05-Mar-2026

Court

Chief Judicial Magistrate , Aurangabad

Judge

2-XIII Judicial Magistrate F.C. Abad.

Decision Date

23-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--ALLOWED OTHERWISE

Last updated 29-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 503

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Satish Machhindra Nage

    Adv. Solankar S.L.

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.The State of Maharashtra

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 23-Mar-2026

    Order on ExhibitView PDF

    The court allowed Satish Machhindra Nage's application for custody of his seized auto-rickshaw, finding him to be the registered owner with matching documentation. The court reasoned that prolonged police custody would cause deterioration, and granted interim custody on a ₹1 lakh indemnity bond, with conditions prohibiting alienation, modification, or color change, and requiring the vehicle's production for trial purposes. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 23-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    XIII Judicial Magistrate F.C. Abad.

  4. 18-Mar-2026

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    XIII Judicial Magistrate F.C. Abad.

  5. 17-Mar-2026

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    XIII Judicial Magistrate F.C. Abad.

  6. 12-Mar-2026

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    XIII Judicial Magistrate F.C. Abad.

  7. 10-Mar-2026

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    XIII Judicial Magistrate F.C. Abad.

  8. 06-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  9. 05-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 926/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The court allowed Satish Machhindra Nage's application for custody of his seized auto-rickshaw, finding him to be the registered owner with matching documentation. The court reasoned that prolonged police custody would cause deterioration, and granted interim custody on a ₹1 lakh indemnity bond, with conditions prohibiting alienation, modification, or color change, and requiring the vehicle's production for trial purposes. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case