The State vs Suresh Uttamchand Sethiya Advocate - RUNWAL N.D. — 300396/2004
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 32432350434. Status: Arguments. Next hearing: 17th July 2026.
R.C.C. - Regular Criminal Case
CNR: MHJN030005282004
Filing Number
300396/2004
Filing Date
09-Jul-2004
Registration No
300396/2004
Registration Date
09-Jul-2004
Court
Chief Judicial Magistrate , Jalna
Judge
47-Judicial Magistrate First Class -- 2
Last updated 16-Jul-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.The State
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
-
1.Suresh Uttamchand Sethiya Advocate - RUNWAL N.D.
-
2.Ritesh Suresh Sethiya
Adv. KR kabra
-
3.Rupesh @ Dharmendra Suresh Sethiya
Adv. KR Kabra
Case History
-
17-Jul-2026
Next hearingPending
-
29-Jun-2026
Arguments
Judicial Magistrate First Class -- 2
-
22-Jun-2026
Arguments
Judicial Magistrate First Class -- 2
-
15-Jun-2026
Arguments
Judicial Magistrate First Class -- 2
-
26-May-2026
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate First Class - 1
-
28-Apr-2026
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate First Class - 1
-
09-Apr-2026
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate First Class - 1
-
02-Apr-2026
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate First Class - 1
-
12-Mar-2026
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate First Class - 1
-
02-Jan-2026
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Judicial Magistrate First Class - 1
-
03-Dec-2025
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Judicial Magistrate First Class - 1
-
28-Nov-2025
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Judicial Magistrate First Class - 1
-
03-Nov-2025
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Judicial Magistrate First Class - 1
-
03-Sep-2025
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Judicial Magistrate First Class - 1
-
24-Jul-2025
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Judicial Magistrate First Class - 1
-
05-Jul-2025
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Judicial Magistrate First Class - 1
-
25-Jun-2025
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Judicial Magistrate First Class - 1
-
07-May-2025
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Judicial Magistrate First Class - 2
-
03-Apr-2025
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Judicial Magistrate First Class - 4
-
17-Mar-2025
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Judicial Magistrate First Class - 4
-
15-Feb-2025
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Judicial Magistrate First Class - 4
-
21-Jan-2025
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Judicial Magistrate First Class - 4
-
24-Dec-2024
Hearing
Judicial Magistrate First Class - 4
-
05-Dec-2024
Hearing
Judicial Magistrate First Class - 4
-
07-Nov-2024
Hearing
Judicial Magistrate First Class - 4
-
14-Oct-2024
Hearing
Judicial Magistrate First Class - 4
-
23-Sep-2024
Hearing
Judicial Magistrate First Class - 4
-
06-Sep-2024
Hearing
Judicial Magistrate First Class - 4
-
28-Aug-2024
Hearing
Judicial Magistrate First Class - 4
-
13-Aug-2024
Hearing
Judicial Magistrate First Class - 4
-
12-Aug-2024
Supply of Copies
Judicial Magistrate First Class - 4
-
06-Aug-2024
Argument on Exh.____Ready
Judicial Magistrate First Class - 4
-
25-Jul-2024
Compliance
Judicial Magistrate First Class - 4
-
16-Jul-2024
Compliance
Judicial Magistrate First Class - 4
-
11-Jul-2024
Say / Hearing on Exh____Ready
Judicial Magistrate First Class - 4
-
09-Jul-2024
Arguments
Judicial Magistrate First Class - 4
-
06-Jul-2024
Arguments
Judicial Magistrate First Class - 4
-
24-Jun-2024
Arguments
Judicial Magistrate First Class - 4
-
04-Jun-2024
Order on Exhibit
Case Summary: RCC 396/2004 Outcome: Both applications filed by the accused persons were rejected. The accused sought to recall prosecution witnesses for further cross-examination and summon new defence witnesses, citing inadequate legal representation by their previous counsel who lacked criminal law expertise. However, the court found these applications untenable, noting that the High Court's remand order specifically limited the proceedings to re-writing the judgment after hearing arguments from both sides—not for introducing fresh evidence or recalling witnesses. The court also observed that the accused had previously declined to lead defence evidence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
04-Jun-2024
Arguments
Judicial Magistrate First Class - 4
-
29-May-2024
Hearing
Judicial Magistrate First Class - 4
-
20-Apr-2024
Hearing
Judicial Magistrate First Class - 4
-
22-Mar-2024
Hearing
Judicial Magistrate First Class - 4
-
29-Feb-2024
Hearing
Judicial Magistrate First Class - 4
-
02-Feb-2024
Hearing
Judicial Magistrate First Class - 4
-
16-Jan-2024
Hearing
Judicial Magistrate First Class - 4
-
27-Dec-2023
Hearing
Judicial Magistrate First Class - 4
-
20-Dec-2023
Hearing
Judicial Magistrate First Class - 4
-
05-Dec-2023
Arguments
Judicial Magistrate First Class - 4
-
22-Nov-2023
Arguments
Judicial Magistrate First Class - 4
-
02-Nov-2023
Arguments
Judicial Magistrate First Class - 4
-
16-Oct-2023
Arguments
Judicial Magistrate First Class - 4
-
29-Sep-2023
Arguments
Judicial Magistrate First Class - 4
-
11-Sep-2023
Arguments
Judicial Magistrate First Class - 4
-
23-Aug-2023
Arguments
Judicial Magistrate First Class - 4
-
07-Aug-2023
Arguments
Judicial Magistrate First Class - 4
-
14-Jul-2023
Restored
Judicial Magistrate First Class - 4
-
14-Jul-2023
Arguments
Judicial Magistrate First Class - 4
-
14-Jul-2023
Arguments
Judicial Magistrate First Class - 4
-
29-Oct-2005
Disposed
-
04-Oct-2005
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
09-Jul-2004
Case filed
Registration No. 300396/2004
Case Summary: RCC 396/2004 Outcome: Both applications filed by the accused persons were rejected. The accused sought to recall prosecution witnesses for further cross-examination and summon new defence witnesses, citing inadequate legal representation by their previous counsel who lacked criminal law expertise. However, the court found these applications untenable, noting that the High Court's remand order specifically limited the proceedings to re-writing the judgment after hearing arguments from both sides—not for introducing fresh evidence or recalling witnesses. The court also observed that the accused had previously declined to lead defence evidence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts