Kapil Ramprasad Neware vs State of Maharashtra Through PSO Gangazari Advocate - Chandwani M. S. — 77/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 482. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED / GRANTED AFTER FULL HEARING on 18th March 2026.
Cri.Bail Appln. - Bail Application
CNR: MHGO010004052026
e-Filing Number
25-02-2026
Filing Number
174/2026
Filing Date
25-02-2026
Registration No
77/2026
Registration Date
26-02-2026
Court
District and Session Court , Gondia
Judge
41-District Judge-2 Addl. Sessions Judge Gondia
Decision Date
18th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ALLOWED / GRANTED AFTER FULL HEARING
FIR Details
FIR Number
86
Police Station
Gangazari
Year
2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Kapil Ramprasad Neware
Adv. Sheikh P.Z.
Respondent(s)
State of Maharashtra Through PSO Gangazari Advocate - Chandwani M. S.
Hearing History
Judge: 41-District Judge-2 Addl. Sessions Judge Gondia
Disposed
Hearing
Hearing
Hearing
Hearing
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 18-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 17-03-2026 | Hearing |
| 16-03-2026 | Hearing |
| 13-03-2026 | Hearing |
| 11-03-2026 | Hearing |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The Additional Sessions Judge, Gondia granted anticipatory bail to applicant Kapil s/o Ramprasad Neware in a rash and negligent driving case. The judge found significant investigative lapses—including inconsistencies in vehicle recovery documentation, missing CCTV evidence of the actual incident, lack of spot sketch, and no justified reason for custodial interrogation—undermining the prosecution's case. The applicant was released on a PR bond of Rs. 20,000 with one surety of equal amount, subject to conditions including non-interference with witnesses and cooperation in investigation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
Summary The Additional Sessions Judge, Gondia granted anticipatory bail to applicant Kapil s/o Ramprasad Neware in a rash and negligent driving case. The judge found significant investigative lapses—including inconsistencies in vehicle recovery documentation, missing CCTV evidence of the actual incident, lack of spot sketch, and no justified reason for custodial interrogation—undermining the prosecution's case. The applicant was released on a PR bond of Rs. 20,000 with one surety of equal amount, subject to conditions including non-interference with witnesses and cooperation in investigation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts