Sairam Suresh Ramgirwar vs State of Maharashtra Through P. S. O. Aheri. Advocate - DGP/AGP — 5/2025

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 438. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED / GRANTED AFTER FULL HEARING on 16th May 2026.

Cri.Rev.App.

CNR: MHGA130003692025

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

23-09-2025

Filing Number

318/2025

Filing Date

24-09-2025

Registration No

5/2025

Registration Date

24-09-2025

Court

District and Additional Sessions Court Aheri

Judge

1-District Judge-1 and Additional Sessions Judge, Aheri

Decision Date

16th May 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED / GRANTED AFTER FULL HEARING

FIR Details

FIR Number

182

Police Station

Aheri

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 438

Petitioner(s)

Sairam Suresh Ramgirwar

Adv. U.S.Galbale

Respondent(s)

State of Maharashtra Through P. S. O. Aheri. Advocate - DGP/AGP

Hearing History

Judge: 1-District Judge-1 and Additional Sessions Judge, Aheri

16-05-2026

Disposed

02-05-2026

Hearing

16-04-2026

Awaiting Notice

12-03-2026

Awaiting Notice

29-01-2026

Awaiting Notice

Final Orders / Judgements

16-05-2026
Copy of Judgment

The Additional Sessions Judge allowed Sairam Ramgirwar's revision application and set aside the lower court's rejection of his vehicle release request, but conditioned release of the seized Tata Sumo on furnishing a bank guarantee or depositing Rs. 15 lakh. The court found the trial court erred by rejecting the application outright without offering the appellant an opportunity to provide security, as required under the Supreme Court's Jayprakash judgment, though it upheld that security was necessary given the vehicle was uninsured at the time of the fatal accident. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

The Additional Sessions Judge allowed Sairam Ramgirwar's revision application and set aside the lower court's rejection of his vehicle release request, but conditioned release of the seized Tata Sumo on furnishing a bank guarantee or depositing Rs. 15 lakh. The court found the trial court erred by rejecting the application outright without offering the appellant an opportunity to provide security, as required under the Supreme Court's Jayprakash judgment, though it upheld that security was necessary given the vehicle was uninsured at the time of the fatal accident. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

District and Additional Sessions Court Aheri All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case