Rahul Vijay Dalvi vs State of Maharashtra — 49/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483. Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED / REJECTED AFTER FULL TRIAL / HEARING on 11th March 2026.

Cri.Bail Appln.

CNR: MHBU010003232026

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

24-02-2026

Filing Number

122/2026

Filing Date

24-02-2026

Registration No

49/2026

Registration Date

24-02-2026

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 483
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 118(1),296,115,352,351(2),3(5),111

Petitioner(s)

Rahul Vijay Dalvi

Adv. Sawadatkar NP

Roshan Ganesh Shinde

Adv. Sawadatkar NP

Respondent(s)

State of Maharashtra

Hearing History

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

11-03-2026

Disposed

10-03-2026

Order

05-03-2026

Awaiting Notice

02-03-2026

Awaiting Notice

27-02-2026

Awaiting Notice

Final Orders / Judgements

11-03-2026
Order on Exhibit

Summary The Additional Sessions Judge, Buldhana, rejected the bail application of Rahul Vijay Dalvi and Roshan Ganesh Shinde, who were accused of extortion, assault, and intimidation of a medical shop owner. The court found credible evidence of their active participation in the offences based on witness statements and medical examination, coupled with their prior criminal history and the ongoing investigation with an absconding co-accused, making bail denial necessary to prevent tampering with evidence and witness intimidation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The Additional Sessions Judge, Buldhana, rejected the bail application of Rahul Vijay Dalvi and Roshan Ganesh Shinde, who were accused of extortion, assault, and intimidation of a medical shop owner. The court found credible evidence of their active participation in the offences based on witness statements and medical examination, coupled with their prior criminal history and the ongoing investigation with an absconding co-accused, making bail denial necessary to prevent tampering with evidence and witness intimidation. 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