State of Maharashtra Through P.S.O. Bhamragad vs Peka Madi Punghati Advocate - K.P.Pungati — 37/2024
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 435,427,323,143,147,148,149,120(B). Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 01st June 2026.
Sessions Case
CNR: MHGA130002962024
Next Hearing
01st June 2026
Filing Number
213/2024
Filing Date
30-08-2024
Registration No
37/2024
Registration Date
30-08-2024
Court
District and Additional Sessions Court Aheri
Judge
2-District Judge-2 and Additional Sessions Judge Aheri
FIR Details
FIR Number
93
Police Station
Bhamragad
Year
2023
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State of Maharashtra Through P.S.O. Bhamragad
Adv. DGP/AGP
Respondent(s)
Peka Madi Punghati Advocate - K.P.Pungati
Hearing History
Judge: 2-District Judge-2 and Additional Sessions Judge Aheri
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 18-05-2026 | Evidence |
| 02-05-2026 | Evidence |
| 20-04-2026 | Evidence |
| 06-04-2026 | Evidence |
| 12-03-2026 | Evidence |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: Sessions Case No. 37/2024 Outcome: Bail application REJECTED Peka Madi Pungati's second bail application under CrPC Section 439 was rejected on 19.09.2025. The accused is charged under serious offences including IPC Sections 435, 427, 323, 143, 147, 148, 149, 120B; Arms Act Section 5/28; Explosives Act Sections 4-5; and UAPA Sections 13, 16, 18, 20, 23. The court found prima facie evidence that the applicant is an active member of a banned organization. Despite over one year passing since the first bail rejection (19.04.2024), the court held that mere delay cannot override UAPA Section 43-D(5)'s stringent bail conditions when charges involve serious unlawful activities offences. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: Sessions Case No. 37/2024 Outcome: Bail application REJECTED Peka Madi Pungati's second bail application under CrPC Section 439 was rejected on 19.09.2025. The accused is charged under serious offences including IPC Sections 435, 427, 323, 143, 147, 148, 149, 120B; Arms Act Section 5/28; Explosives Act Sections 4-5; and UAPA Sections 13, 16, 18, 20, 23. The court found prima facie evidence that the applicant is an active member of a banned organization. Despite over one year passing since the first bail rejection (19.04.2024), the court held that mere delay cannot override UAPA Section 43-D(5)'s stringent bail conditions when charges involve serious unlawful activities offences. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts