State of Maharashtra PSO, Shegaon City vs Dnyaneshwar Ramkrushna Dhamal — 100/2022
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 188,269,270,3,51(b),135. Disposed: Uncontested--U/SEC. 258 OF CR.PC on 11th March 2026.
S.C.C. - Sum Case
CNR: MHBU070002032022
Filing Number
152/2022
Filing Date
09-02-2022
Registration No
100/2022
Registration Date
09-02-2022
Court
Civil Court Junior Division , shegaon
Judge
2-Jt.Civil Judge Jr.Dn J.M.F.C.Shegaon.
Decision Date
11th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--U/SEC. 258 OF CR.PC
FIR Details
FIR Number
618
Police Station
Shegaon
Year
2021
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State of Maharashtra PSO, Shegaon City
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
Dnyaneshwar Ramkrushna Dhamal
Shubham Vitthalrao Dhage
Akash Subhash Gawande
Shrikabt Rajendra Deshmukh
Ganesh Tulsiram Vasatkat
Dnyaneshwar Sudama Patane
Akshay Mohan Shendre
Shyam Gajanan Adhao
Pravin Arvind Morkhade
Hearing History
Judge: 2-Jt.Civil Judge Jr.Dn J.M.F.C.Shegaon.
Disposed
Awaiting Summons
Awaiting Summons
Awaiting Summons
Awaiting Summons
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 11-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 20-01-2026 | Awaiting Summons |
| 13-11-2025 | Awaiting Summons |
| 29-08-2025 | Awaiting Summons |
| 25-06-2025 | Awaiting Summons |
Final Orders / Judgements
The court stopped proceedings and discharged the accused under Section 258 CrPC in a 3-year-old case involving offences under IPC Sections 188, 269, 270 and the Disaster Management Act, 2005, citing prolonged absence of accused, failure to secure their presence despite summons, and lack of prosecution progress. The court found it a fit case for closure under the Special Drive for reducing judicial pendency, and cancelled any bail bonds furnished by the accused. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The court stopped proceedings and discharged the accused under Section 258 CrPC in a 3-year-old case involving offences under IPC Sections 188, 269, 270 and the Disaster Management Act, 2005, citing prolonged absence of accused, failure to secure their presence despite summons, and lack of prosecution progress. The court found it a fit case for closure under the Special Drive for reducing judicial pendency, and cancelled any bail bonds furnished by the accused. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts