Kashmirsingh Mahendrasingh Bawri vs State Of Maharashtra Through PSO Ballarpur Advocate - Assistant Public Prosecutor — 22/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 497,503. Disposed: Uncontested--ALLOWED / GRANTED AFTER FULL HEARING on 01st April 2026.
Cri.M.A. - Criminal Misc. Application
CNR: MHCH060007512026
e-Filing Number
02-03-2026
Filing Number
716/2026
Filing Date
04-Mar-2026
Registration No
22/2026
Registration Date
05-Mar-2026
Court
Civil Judge, Junior Division and J.M.F.C., Ballarpur
Judge
1-Civil Judge, Jr.Dn, and J.m.f.c., Ballarpur.
Decision Date
01-Apr-2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--ALLOWED / GRANTED AFTER FULL HEARING
Last updated 25-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Kashmirsingh Mahendrasingh Bawri
Adv. Vidhate Balaji Nanaji
Respondent(s)
-
1.State Of Maharashtra Through PSO Ballarpur Advocate - Assistant Public Prosecutor
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
01-Apr-2026
Order on ExhibitView PDF
The court partly allowed Kashmirsingh Mahendrasingh Bavri's application for interim possession of two seized Realme mobile phones under Section 457 CrPC, holding that since ownership was undisputed and electronic devices deteriorate in police custody, return to the owner was appropriate. The court released the mobiles on a ₹50,000 indemnity bond subject to conditions including non-disposal without court permission, preservation of device and data, and prohibition on illegal use. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
01-Apr-2026
Disposed
Civil Judge, Jr.Dn, and J.m.f.c., Ballarpur.
-
30-Mar-2026
Hearing
Civil Judge, Jr.Dn, and J.m.f.c., Ballarpur.
-
23-Mar-2026
Reply/Say
Civil Judge, Jr.Dn, and J.m.f.c., Ballarpur.
-
12-Mar-2026
Reply/Say
Civil Judge, Jr.Dn, and J.m.f.c., Ballarpur.
-
05-Mar-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
04-Mar-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 22/2026
The court partly allowed Kashmirsingh Mahendrasingh Bavri's application for interim possession of two seized Realme mobile phones under Section 457 CrPC, holding that since ownership was undisputed and electronic devices deteriorate in police custody, return to the owner was appropriate. The court released the mobiles on a ₹50,000 indemnity bond subject to conditions including non-disposal without court permission, preservation of device and data, and prohibition on illegal use. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts