Shaikh Khaja Shaikh Pasha vs The State of Maharashtra Through Police Station Ashti Advocate - APP — 39/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 503. Disposed: Uncontested--ALLOWED / GRANTED AFTER FULL HEARING on 23rd March 2026.
Cri.M.A. - Criminal Misc. Application
CNR: MHJN050003122026
e-Filing Number
09-03-2026
Filing Number
240/2026
Filing Date
09-Mar-2026
Registration No
39/2026
Registration Date
10-Mar-2026
Court
Civil Court Junior Division , Partur
Judge
8-Jt. Civil Judge (J.d.) and J.m.f.c., Partur
Decision Date
23-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--ALLOWED / GRANTED AFTER FULL HEARING
Last updated 14-Jun-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
34
Police Station
ASHTI
Year
2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Shaikh Khaja Shaikh Pasha
Adv. MASKE N. M.
Respondent(s)
-
1.The State of Maharashtra Through Police Station Ashti Advocate - APP (Assistant Public Prosecutor)
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
23-Mar-2026
Order on ExhibitView PDF
Case Summary: Shaikh Khaja Shaikh Pasha v. State of Maharashtra (39/2026) The court granted the petitioner's application for interim custody of his seized Mahindra tractor. The court found the petitioner was the registered owner with valid documentary proof and held that keeping the vehicle in police custody until trial would cause it to deteriorate, contrary to Supreme Court precedent. The release was conditioned on executing a ₹7,00,000 indemnity bond and strict conditions prohibiting alterations or sale without court permission, with mandatory production during investigation and trial. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
23-Mar-2026
Disposed
Jt. Civil Judge (J.d.) and J.m.f.c., Partur
-
20-Mar-2026
Hearing
Jt. Civil Judge (J.d.) and J.m.f.c., Partur
-
16-Mar-2026
Appearance
Jt. Civil Judge (J.d.) and J.m.f.c., Partur
-
10-Mar-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
09-Mar-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 39/2026
Case Summary: Shaikh Khaja Shaikh Pasha v. State of Maharashtra (39/2026) The court granted the petitioner's application for interim custody of his seized Mahindra tractor. The court found the petitioner was the registered owner with valid documentary proof and held that keeping the vehicle in police custody until trial would cause it to deteriorate, contrary to Supreme Court precedent. The release was conditioned on executing a ₹7,00,000 indemnity bond and strict conditions prohibiting alterations or sale without court permission, with mandatory production during investigation and trial. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts