Abdul Mukhtar Sattar Patel vs State of Maharashtra - P.I. Police Station, Sirsala Advocate - Phad L.B. — 100/2026
Case under Code of Criminal Procedure Section 438. Disposed: Contested--REJECTED on 30th March 2026.
Cri.Bail Appln. - Bail Application
CNR: MHBI040002302026
e-Filing Number
07-03-2026
Filing Number
169/2026
Filing Date
07-03-2026
Registration No
100/2026
Registration Date
07-03-2026
Court
District and Session Court , Ambajogai
Judge
2-District Judge-1 Addl.Sessions JudgeAmbajogai.
Decision Date
30th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--REJECTED
FIR Details
FIR Number
304
Police Station
Sirsala Police Station
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Abdul Mukhtar Sattar Patel
Adv. Lamb D.D.
Respondent(s)
State of Maharashtra - P.I. Police Station, Sirsala Advocate - Phad L.B.
Hearing History
Judge: 2-District Judge-1 Addl.Sessions JudgeAmbajogai.
Disposed
Arguments
Arguments
Filing of Say on Exh___Unready
Filing of Say on Exh___Unready
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 30-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 25-03-2026 | Arguments |
| 23-03-2026 | Arguments |
| 20-03-2026 | Filing of Say on Exh___Unready |
| 18-03-2026 | Filing of Say on Exh___Unready |
Final Orders / Judgements
The court rejected Abdul Mukhtar Sattar Patel's anticipatory bail application in a case involving alleged fraud related to the unauthorized sale of trust property. The court found strong prima-facie documentary evidence against him, including forged Charity Commissioner certificates and false resolutions, and determined that custodial interrogation was necessary given the serious nature and scope of the offenses. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
The court rejected Abdul Mukhtar Sattar Patel's anticipatory bail application in a case involving alleged fraud related to the unauthorized sale of trust property. The court found strong prima-facie documentary evidence against him, including forged Charity Commissioner certificates and false resolutions, and determined that custodial interrogation was necessary given the serious nature and scope of the offenses. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts