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
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
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.
Disposed
Order
Awaiting Notice
Awaiting Notice
Awaiting Notice
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 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
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.
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
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts