Lakhani Bricks Propriator Sadatali Arefali Sayyad vs The State of Maharashtra Through Police Station Partur — 32/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 503. Disposed: Uncontested--ALLOWED / GRANTED AFTER FULL HEARING on 16th March 2026.
Cri.M.A. - Criminal Misc. Application
CNR: MHJN050002782026
e-Filing Number
02-03-2026
Filing Number
209/2026
Filing Date
02-03-2026
Registration No
32/2026
Registration Date
02-03-2026
Court
Civil Court Junior Division , Partur
Judge
1-Civil Judge (J.D.) and J.M.F.C., Partur
Decision Date
16th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--ALLOWED / GRANTED AFTER FULL HEARING
FIR Details
FIR Number
59
Police Station
PARTUR
Year
2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Lakhani Bricks Propriator Sadatali Arefali Sayyad
Adv. JAWLEKAR A A
Respondent(s)
The State of Maharashtra Through Police Station Partur
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Civil Judge (J.D.) and J.M.F.C., Partur
Disposed
Arguments
Arguments
Arguments
Arguments
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 16-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 13-03-2026 | Arguments |
| 12-03-2026 | Arguments |
| 11-03-2026 | Arguments |
| 10-03-2026 | Arguments |
Final Orders / Judgements
The court allowed the application and released a seized Tata Motors tipper vehicle to the owner Lakhani Bricks on supratnama (bail bond) of Rs. 20 lakhs. The court reasoned that mere vehicle involvement in crime doesn't justify prolonged police custody, and conditions like valid insurance, non-transfer without court permission, and vehicle production on demand adequately protect investigation interests while allowing the rightful owner proper preservation of his property. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The court allowed the application and released a seized Tata Motors tipper vehicle to the owner Lakhani Bricks on supratnama (bail bond) of Rs. 20 lakhs. The court reasoned that mere vehicle involvement in crime doesn't justify prolonged police custody, and conditions like valid insurance, non-transfer without court permission, and vehicle production on demand adequately protect investigation interests while allowing the rightful owner proper preservation of his property. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts