State of Maharashtra P.S. MIDC Waluj vs Shravan Suresh Pimple Advocate - Shaikh J.A. — 145/2025
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 307,34. Status: Evidence Before Charge. Next hearing: 03rd July 2026.
Sessions Case
CNR: MHAU160008932025
Next Hearing
03rd July 2026
Filing Number
384/2025
Filing Date
15-05-2024
Registration No
145/2025
Registration Date
15-05-2024
Court
Gangapur Dist and Sessions Court
Judge
1-District Judge-1 and Addl. Sessions Judge Gangapur
FIR Details
FIR Number
632
Police Station
MIDC WALUJ
Year
2023
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State of Maharashtra P.S. MIDC Waluj
Adv. Ankush A.U.
Respondent(s)
Shravan Suresh Pimple Advocate - Shaikh J.A.
Hearing History
Judge: 1-District Judge-1 and Addl. Sessions Judge Gangapur
Evidence Before Charge
Evidence Before Charge
Evidence Before Charge
Evidence Before Charge
Evidence Before Charge
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 30-04-2026 | Evidence Before Charge |
| 12-03-2026 | Evidence Before Charge |
| 12-02-2026 | Evidence Before Charge |
| 31-01-2026 | Evidence Before Charge |
| 29-01-2026 | Evidence Before Charge |
Interim Orders
Case 145/2025 Summary: Shravan Suresh Pimpale's bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita was rejected. The accused was charged with firing a revolver at informant Arjun Kale on 25.07.2023, causing a gunshot wound to his knee. The court found prima facie reliable evidence through eyewitness statements and medical evidence supporting the prosecution case, noted the accused is a habitual offender with eight serious pending criminal cases, and determined there exists risk of absconding and evidence tampering if released. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case 145/2025 Summary: Shravan Suresh Pimpale's bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita was rejected. The accused was charged with firing a revolver at informant Arjun Kale on 25.07.2023, causing a gunshot wound to his knee. The court found prima facie reliable evidence through eyewitness statements and medical evidence supporting the prosecution case, noted the accused is a habitual offender with eight serious pending criminal cases, and determined there exists risk of absconding and evidence tampering if released. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts