Shri Samarth Traders Pro Pra Prabhakar Dnyanoba Supekar vs The State of Maharashtra Through Police Station Partur Advocate - APP — 34/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 503. Disposed: Contested--REJECTED on 10th April 2026.
Cri.M.A. - Criminal Misc. Application
CNR: MHJN050002902026
e-Filing Number
02-03-2026
Filing Number
221/2026
Filing Date
05-03-2026
Registration No
34/2026
Registration Date
06-03-2026
Court
Civil Court Junior Division , Partur
Judge
1-Civil Judge (J.D.) and J.M.F.C., Partur
Decision Date
10th April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--REJECTED
FIR Details
FIR Number
40
Police Station
PARTUR
Year
2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Shri Samarth Traders Pro Pra Prabhakar Dnyanoba Supekar
Adv. LIMBULKAR R.L.
Respondent(s)
The State of Maharashtra Through Police Station Partur Advocate - APP (Assistant Public Prosecutor)
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Civil Judge (J.D.) and J.M.F.C., Partur
Disposed
Order
Arguments
Filing of Say on Exh___Unready
Filing of Say on Exh___Unready
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 10-04-2026 | Disposed |
| 09-04-2026 | Order |
| 08-04-2026 | Arguments |
| 07-04-2026 | Filing of Say on Exh___Unready |
| 06-04-2026 | Filing of Say on Exh___Unready |
Final Orders / Judgements
The court rejected Shri Samarth Traders' application seeking release of seized mobile phones, earbuds, and silver earrings under Section 503 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The applicant claimed ownership of the items, contending they were purchased by the accused using Rs. 10 lakh stolen from his shop, but the court found insufficient documentary evidence to prove either his ownership of the seized items or that they were purchased from the stolen amount, holding that releasing them would create difficulties during trial proceedings while investigation is ongoing. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The court rejected Shri Samarth Traders' application seeking release of seized mobile phones, earbuds, and silver earrings under Section 503 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The applicant claimed ownership of the items, contending they were purchased by the accused using Rs. 10 lakh stolen from his shop, but the court found insufficient documentary evidence to prove either his ownership of the seized items or that they were purchased from the stolen amount, holding that releasing them would create difficulties during trial proceedings while investigation is ongoing. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts