Jaishree Bharat Gaikwad vs State of Maharashtra - Rural Police Station Parli V. — 102/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 503. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED / GRANTED AFTER FULL HEARING on 16th March 2026.

Case disposed

Cri.M.A. - Criminal Misc. Application

CNR: MHBI130004852026

e-Filing Number

27-02-2026

Filing Number

326/2026

Filing Date

27-Feb-2026

Registration No

102/2026

Registration Date

27-Feb-2026

Court

Civil Court Junior Division , Parli

Judge

3-Cjjd And JMFC Parli Vaijnath

Decision Date

16-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED / GRANTED AFTER FULL HEARING

Last updated 25-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

0012

Police Station

Rural Police Station Parli V

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 503

Petitioner(s)

1.Jaishree Bharat Gaikwad

Adv. UJGARE DEELIP SAMBHAJI

Respondent(s)

1.State of Maharashtra - Rural Police Station Parli V.

Case History

Case disposedDisposed
16-Mar-2026

Order on ExhibitView PDF

Summary: The court allowed Jaishri Gaikwad's application for release of a seized VIVO mobile phone, finding that the applicant proved ownership through bill, Aadhar card, and FIR documents, with no sufficient reason to detain it. The court ordered release of the mobile subject to photographing, preparing a panchnama, and the applicant executing a ₹16,000 indemnity bond with surety, stipulating the device cannot be sold or disposed of until the criminal case concludes. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
16-Mar-2026

Disposed

Cjjd And JMFC Parli Vaijnath
12-Mar-2026

Arguments

Cjjd And JMFC Parli Vaijnath
09-Mar-2026

Arguments

Cjjd And JMFC Parli Vaijnath
07-Mar-2026

Arguments

Cjjd And JMFC Parli Vaijnath
05-Mar-2026

Arguments

Cjjd And JMFC Parli Vaijnath
27-Feb-2026

First hearing

Initial hearing scheduled
27-Feb-2026

Case filed

Registration No. 102/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The court allowed Jaishri Gaikwad's application for release of a seized VIVO mobile phone, finding that the applicant proved ownership through bill, Aadhar card, and FIR documents, with no sufficient reason to detain it. The court ordered release of the mobile subject to photographing, preparing a panchnama, and the applicant executing a ₹16,000 indemnity bond with surety, stipulating the device cannot be sold or disposed of until the criminal case concludes. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.