Sagar Kushkumar Verulkar vs Prafull Raghunath Dane — 52/2025
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483(3). Disposed: Contested--REJECTED on 11th March 2026.
Cri.M.A.
CNR: MHBU110009012025
e-Filing Number
15-09-2025
Filing Number
399/2025
Filing Date
16-09-2025
Registration No
52/2025
Registration Date
16-09-2025
Court
District and Sessions Judge, Malkapur
Judge
1-District Judge-1 Addl. Sess. Judge
Decision Date
11th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--REJECTED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Sagar Kushkumar Verulkar
Adv. SAGAR BHARAT SURYAVANSHI
Respondent(s)
Prafull Raghunath Dane
Hearing History
Judge: 1-District Judge-1 Addl. Sess. Judge
Disposed
Order
Hearing
Order
Order
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 11-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 07-03-2026 | Order |
| 06-03-2026 | Hearing |
| 27-02-2026 | Order |
| 25-02-2026 | Order |
Final Orders / Judgements
The Additional Sessions Judge, Malkapur rejected the applicant's plea to cancel the anticipatory bail granted to respondent Prafulla Raghunath Dane, finding insufficient evidence of breach of bail conditions. The court held that the applicant lacked personal knowledge of the accused's non-attendance at the police station, the investigating officer took no corrective action despite being aware of conditions, and the investigation was completed without hindrance. Regarding court attendance, the court noted no evidence that charge-sheet information or summons was served on the accused, thus he could not be held liable for non-appearance. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
The Additional Sessions Judge, Malkapur rejected the applicant's plea to cancel the anticipatory bail granted to respondent Prafulla Raghunath Dane, finding insufficient evidence of breach of bail conditions. The court held that the applicant lacked personal knowledge of the accused's non-attendance at the police station, the investigating officer took no corrective action despite being aware of conditions, and the investigation was completed without hindrance. Regarding court attendance, the court noted no evidence that charge-sheet information or summons was served on the accused, thus he could not be held liable for non-appearance. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts