Mahendra Anaram Fardauda vs State of Maharashtra — 172/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483. Disposed: Contested--BAIL GRANTED on 09th March 2026.

Cri.Bail Appln. - Bail Application

CNR: MHDH010007472026

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

21-02-2026

Filing Number

331/2026

Filing Date

21-02-2026

Registration No

172/2026

Registration Date

21-02-2026

Court

District and Session Court ,Dhule

Judge

29-District Judge 4 and Additional Sessions Judge Dhule

Decision Date

09th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--BAIL GRANTED

FIR Details

FIR Number

42

Police Station

Shirpur Sangvi

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 123,223,274,275
Food Safety and Standards Act,2006 Section 26(2)(i)(iv),27(2)(d),27(3)(c),3,59(i)

Petitioner(s)

Mahendra Anaram Fardauda

Adv. Waghmare B. B.

Respondent(s)

State of Maharashtra

Hearing History

Judge: 29-District Judge 4 and Additional Sessions Judge Dhule

09-03-2026

Disposed

07-03-2026

Order

05-03-2026

Argument on Exh.____Unready

02-03-2026

Notice_Unready

24-02-2026

Notice_Unready

Final Orders / Judgements

09-03-2026
Order on Exhibit

The court granted bail to Mahendra Anaram Fardauda, who was accused of transporting contraband panmasala and scented tobacco worth Rs. 23,19,510 in a luxury bus under Food Safety and Standards Act offences. The court found no justifiable ground for detention since the offences were non-bailable, the contraband and vehicle were already seized, and there was no risk of tampering with public servant witnesses, while suitable bail conditions could address concerns about absconding. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

The court granted bail to Mahendra Anaram Fardauda, who was accused of transporting contraband panmasala and scented tobacco worth Rs. 23,19,510 in a luxury bus under Food Safety and Standards Act offences. The court found no justifiable ground for detention since the offences were non-bailable, the contraband and vehicle were already seized, and there was no risk of tampering with public servant witnesses, while suitable bail conditions could address concerns about absconding. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

District and Session Court ,Dhule All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case