Anilkumar S/o.Rupchand Uke vs Laxmibai wd/o Lekhram Meshram and others Advocate - Pogale M C — 22/2024
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 406, 420, 465, 468, 471. Status: Argument on Exh.____Unready. Next hearing: 20th June 2026.
R.C.C. - Regular Criminal Case
CNR: MHGO050001812024
Filing Number
156/2024
Filing Date
26-Mar-2024
Registration No
22/2024
Registration Date
26-Mar-2024
Court
Civil Court Junior Division ,Sadakarjuni
Judge
1-Civil Judge Jr.Dn. And JMFC Sadak Arjuni
Last updated 20-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Anilkumar S/o.Rupchand Uke
Adv. Lanje R.K.
Respondent(s)
-
1.Laxmibai wd/o Lekhram Meshram and others Advocate - Pogale M C
-
2.Vijaykuamr Lekhram Meshram
Adv. Pogale M C
-
3.Malchand Puna Meshram
Adv. Pogale M C
-
4.Vijendra Lekhram Meshram
Adv. Pogale M C
Case History
-
20-Jun-2026
Next hearingPending
-
29-Apr-2026
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Civil Judge Jr.Dn. And JMFC Sadak Arjuni
-
08-Apr-2026
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Civil Judge Jr.Dn. And JMFC Sadak Arjuni
-
18-Mar-2026
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Civil Judge Jr.Dn. And JMFC Sadak Arjuni
-
18-Feb-2026
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Civil Judge Jr.Dn. And JMFC Sadak Arjuni
-
07-Jan-2026
Evidence Before Charge
Civil Judge Jr.Dn. And JMFC Sadak Arjuni
-
04-Dec-2025
Evidence Before Charge
Civil Judge Jr.Dn. And JMFC Sadak Arjuni
-
12-Nov-2025
Evidence Before Charge
Civil Judge Jr.Dn. And JMFC Sadak Arjuni
-
04-Oct-2025
Evidence Before Charge
Civil Judge Jr.Dn. And JMFC Sadak Arjuni
-
03-Sep-2025
Evidence Before Charge
Civil Judge Jr.Dn. And JMFC Sadak Arjuni
-
31-Jul-2025
Order on ExhibitView PDF
Case Summary: 22/2024 The petition filed by Anilkumar S/o Rupchand Uke under CrPC Section 204 for review of a March 26, 2024 order was dismissed. The court found jurisdictional defects: respondents 2 and 3 lack legal standing as they are deceased or non-existent persons (respondent 2 died in 1980 with no documented heirs; respondent 3 was never born). The petitioner failed to establish proper heirship documentation and filed only against respondent 1's land without valid claims against the other respondents. The court held the petition civilly natured and inappropriate for criminal proceedings, therefore rejecting the petition as unmaintainable. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
31-Jul-2025
Evidence Before Charge
Civil Judge Jr.Dn. And JMFC Sadak Arjuni
-
02-Jul-2025
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Civil Judge Jr.Dn. And JMFC Sadak Arjuni
-
11-Jun-2025
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Civil Judge Jr.Dn. And JMFC Sadak Arjuni
-
17-May-2025
Order
Civil Judge Jr.Dn. And JMFC Sadak Arjuni
-
05-Apr-2025
Order
Civil Judge Jr.Dn. And JMFC Sadak Arjuni
-
07-Mar-2025
Order
Civil Judge Jr.Dn. And JMFC Sadak Arjuni
-
31-Jan-2025
Order
Civil Judge Jr.Dn. And JMFC Sadak Arjuni
-
23-Dec-2024
Reply/Say
Civil Judge Jr.Dn. And JMFC Sadak Arjuni
-
22-Nov-2024
Evidence Before Charge
Civil Judge Jr.Dn. And JMFC Sadak Arjuni
-
25-Oct-2024
Reply/Say
Civil Judge Jr.Dn. And JMFC Sadak Arjuni
-
25-Sep-2024
Reply/Say
Civil Judge Jr.Dn. And JMFC Sadak Arjuni
-
14-Aug-2024
N.B.W._Unready
Civil Judge Jr.Dn. And JMFC Sadak Arjuni
-
20-Jul-2024
Evidence Before Charge
Civil Judge Jr.Dn. And JMFC Sadak Arjuni
-
12-Jun-2024
Evidence Before Charge
Civil Judge Jr.Dn. And JMFC Sadak Arjuni
-
02-May-2024
Evidence Before Charge
Civil Judge Jr.Dn. And JMFC Sadak Arjuni
-
26-Mar-2024
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
26-Mar-2024
Case filed
Registration No. 22/2024
Case Summary: 22/2024 The petition filed by Anilkumar S/o Rupchand Uke under CrPC Section 204 for review of a March 26, 2024 order was dismissed. The court found jurisdictional defects: respondents 2 and 3 lack legal standing as they are deceased or non-existent persons (respondent 2 died in 1980 with no documented heirs; respondent 3 was never born). The petitioner failed to establish proper heirship documentation and filed only against respondent 1's land without valid claims against the other respondents. The court held the petition civilly natured and inappropriate for criminal proceedings, therefore rejecting the petition as unmaintainable. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts