State of Maharashtra vs Sunil Shivaji Dhotre Advocate - Ballal AS — 93/2024
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 395,120B. Status: Awaiting Muddemal. Next hearing: 20th May 2026.
Sessions Case
CNR: MHBU010015852024
Next Hearing
20th May 2026
Filing Number
763/2024
Filing Date
25-11-2024
Registration No
93/2024
Registration Date
25-11-2024
Court
District and Session Court Buldhana
Judge
14-District Judge-3 and Additional Sessions Judge Buldana
FIR Details
FIR Number
49
Police Station
Andhera
Year
2024
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State of Maharashtra
Adv. APP Kesale AA
Respondent(s)
Sunil Shivaji Dhotre Advocate - Ballal AS
Bahadur Paswan Sukkhuprasad Paswan
Adv. Dinode AR
Vishnu Govind Bankar
Adv. Kale AS
Darasing Babusing Rajput
Adv. Dinode AR
Kachuru Shrikisan Padul
Adv. Sakhare NB
Bhagwat Balu Raut
Adv. Ballal AS
Sandip Dilip Kadam
Adv. LADCS Chief Adv Sanap P.R
Nilesh Gorakshanath Kale
Adv. Ballal AS
Abhijit Shivaji Tambe
Adv. Bhalerao SC
Hearing History
Judge: 14-District Judge-3 and Additional Sessions Judge Buldana
Awaiting Muddemal
Awaiting Muddemal
Awaiting Muddemal
Awaiting Muddemal
Awaiting Muddemal
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 08-05-2026 | Awaiting Muddemal |
| 27-04-2026 | Awaiting Muddemal |
| 15-04-2026 | Awaiting Muddemal |
| 02-04-2026 | Awaiting Muddemal |
| 20-03-2026 | Awaiting Muddemal |
Interim Orders
SUMMARY: The bail application of accused Sandip Dilip Kadam (Accused No. 7) under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in a dacoity case involving Rs. 27 lakhs was rejected. The court found that the accused played a major role in the offense, has criminal antecedents, is a habitual offender, and poses a risk of tampering with prosecution evidence and jumping bail, particularly since his previous bail applications had already been rejected twice. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
SUMMARY: The bail application of accused Sandip Dilip Kadam (Accused No. 7) under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in a dacoity case involving Rs. 27 lakhs was rejected. The court found that the accused played a major role in the offense, has criminal antecedents, is a habitual offender, and poses a risk of tampering with prosecution evidence and jumping bail, particularly since his previous bail applications had already been rejected twice. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts