Mayur Sunil Apar vs State of Maharashtra Advocate - DGP — 43/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 482. Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED / REJECTED AFTER FULL TRIAL / HEARING on 11th March 2026.

Cri.Bail Appln.

CNR: MHBU010002922026

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

20-02-2026

Filing Number

113/2026

Filing Date

20-02-2026

Registration No

43/2026

Registration Date

20-02-2026

Court

District and Session Court Buldhana

Judge

8-District Judge-2 & Additional Sess.Judge, Buldana.

Decision Date

11th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISMISSED / REJECTED AFTER FULL TRIAL / HEARING

FIR Details

FIR Number

40

Police Station

Dhad

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 482
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 118(1),296,115,352,351(2),3(5),111

Petitioner(s)

Mayur Sunil Apar

Adv. Sawadatkar NP

Respondent(s)

State of Maharashtra Advocate - DGP

Hearing History

Judge: 8-District Judge-2 & Additional Sess.Judge, Buldana.

11-03-2026

Disposed

10-03-2026

Order

05-03-2026

Reply/Say

04-03-2026

Awaiting Notice

02-03-2026

Order

Final Orders / Judgements

11-03-2026
Order on Exhibit

The Additional Sessions Judge, Buldhana, rejected the anticipatory bail application of Mayur Sunil Apar in a case involving extortion and assault. Although the applicant's name did not appear in the FIR, the court found CCTV footage confirming his presence at the crime scene, his contact with other accused persons, and determined he may be required for interrogation given the serious nature of organized crime allegations. The court balanced personal liberty against societal interest and declined to grant pre-arrest bail. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

The Additional Sessions Judge, Buldhana, rejected the anticipatory bail application of Mayur Sunil Apar in a case involving extortion and assault. Although the applicant's name did not appear in the FIR, the court found CCTV footage confirming his presence at the crime scene, his contact with other accused persons, and determined he may be required for interrogation given the serious nature of organized crime allegations. The court balanced personal liberty against societal interest and declined to grant pre-arrest bail. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

District and Session Court Buldhana All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case