Sunita Pappu Alias Papu Suryawanshi vs State of Maharashtra - Rural Police Station Parli V. — 95/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 503. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED / GRANTED AFTER FULL HEARING on 12th March 2026.
Cri.M.A. - Criminal Misc. Application
CNR: MHBI130004412026
e-Filing Number
21-02-2026
Filing Number
295/2026
Filing Date
23-02-2026
Registration No
95/2026
Registration Date
23-02-2026
Court
Civil Court Junior Division , Parli
Judge
2-JOINT CJJD AND JMFC PARLI VAIJNATH
Decision Date
12th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ALLOWED / GRANTED AFTER FULL HEARING
FIR Details
FIR Number
12
Police Station
Rural Police Station Parli V
Year
2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Sunita Pappu Alias Papu Suryawanshi
Adv. UJGARE DEELIP SAMBHAJI
Respondent(s)
State of Maharashtra - Rural Police Station Parli V.
Hearing History
Judge: 2-JOINT CJJD AND JMFC PARLI VAIJNATH
Disposed
Order
Order
Order
Reply/Say
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 12-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 10-03-2026 | Order |
| 07-03-2026 | Order |
| 05-03-2026 | Order |
| 23-02-2026 | Reply/Say |
Final Orders / Judgements
The court allowed Sunita Suryawanshi's application for temporary custody of her seized Vivo mobile phone, finding prima facie evidence of her ownership through Aadhar card and purchase receipt, with no sufficient reason for continued detention. The court directed the Investigation Officer to photograph the device, prepare a Panchanama, and hand it over to the applicant upon execution of a ₹20,000 indemnity bond, with conditions that the phone not be sold or disposed of and be produced as directed until case conclusion. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The court allowed Sunita Suryawanshi's application for temporary custody of her seized Vivo mobile phone, finding prima facie evidence of her ownership through Aadhar card and purchase receipt, with no sufficient reason for continued detention. The court directed the Investigation Officer to photograph the device, prepare a Panchanama, and hand it over to the applicant upon execution of a ₹20,000 indemnity bond, with conditions that the phone not be sold or disposed of and be produced as directed until case conclusion. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts