Anil Shamrao Fepale vs State of Maharashtra Advocate - DGP — 65/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 74,115,324(2),351(2). Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED / GRANTED AFTER FULL HEARING on 18th March 2026.
Cri.Bail Appln.
CNR: MHBU010004102026
e-Filing Number
04-03-2026
Filing Number
150/2026
Filing Date
04-03-2026
Registration No
65/2026
Registration Date
04-03-2026
Court
District and Session Court Buldhana
Judge
8-District Judge-2 & Additional Sess.Judge, Buldana.
Decision Date
18th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ALLOWED / GRANTED AFTER FULL HEARING
FIR Details
FIR Number
68
Police Station
Dhad
Year
2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Anil Shamrao Fepale
Adv. Sakhare NB
Ravindra Prakash Giri
Adv. Sakhare NB
Vikas Madan Bharati
Adv. Sakhare NB
Respondent(s)
State of Maharashtra Advocate - DGP
Hearing History
Judge: 8-District Judge-2 & Additional Sess.Judge, Buldana.
Disposed
Order
Order
Reply/Say
Awaiting Notice
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 18-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 17-03-2026 | Order | |
| 13-03-2026 | Order | |
| 10-03-2026 | Reply/Say | |
| 05-03-2026 | Awaiting Notice |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The Additional Sessions Judge, Buldhana granted anticipatory bail to three accused (Anil Shamrao Fepale, Ravindra Prakash Giri, and Vikas Madan Bharati) charged with assault and SC/ST Act violations. The court found insufficient evidence that SCST Act offences were committed, noting the FIR lacked caste-related details and victim statements never mentioned caste abuse—SCST charges were added only after a third party's police statement. Each accused was released on Rs. 25,000 personal bond with strict conditions including weekly police reporting and non-interference with witnesses. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The Additional Sessions Judge, Buldhana granted anticipatory bail to three accused (Anil Shamrao Fepale, Ravindra Prakash Giri, and Vikas Madan Bharati) charged with assault and SC/ST Act violations. The court found insufficient evidence that SCST Act offences were committed, noting the FIR lacked caste-related details and victim statements never mentioned caste abuse—SCST charges were added only after a third party's police statement. Each accused was released on Rs. 25,000 personal bond with strict conditions including weekly police reporting and non-interference with witnesses. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts