Bharat Arunrao Kantule vs The State of Maharashtra Through Police Station Ashti — 41/2026
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: MHJN050003482026
e-Filing Number
11-03-2026
Filing Number
269/2026
Filing Date
12-Mar-2026
Registration No
41/2026
Registration Date
12-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
30
Police Station
ASHTI
Year
2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Bharat Arunrao Kantule
Adv. LIMBULKAR R.L.
Respondent(s)
-
1.The State of Maharashtra Through Police Station Ashti
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
23-Mar-2026
Order on ExhibitView PDF
Case Summary: Bharat Arunrao Kantule v. State of Maharashtra (41/2026) The court allowed the applicant's petition for interim custody of his seized Bharat Benz goods carrier vehicle. The judge found the applicant was the registered owner with valid documentation and held that allowing the vehicle to deteriorate in police custody during trial would be wasteful and contrary to Supreme Court precedent. The vehicle was released on an indemnity bond of ₹38 lakh with conditions: applicant must produce it as needed, cannot alter or sell it without court permission, and police must document its condition via photographs. 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
Awaiting Notice
Jt. Civil Judge (J.d.) and J.m.f.c., Partur
-
13-Mar-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
12-Mar-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 41/2026
Case Summary: Bharat Arunrao Kantule v. State of Maharashtra (41/2026) The court allowed the applicant's petition for interim custody of his seized Bharat Benz goods carrier vehicle. The judge found the applicant was the registered owner with valid documentation and held that allowing the vehicle to deteriorate in police custody during trial would be wasteful and contrary to Supreme Court precedent. The vehicle was released on an indemnity bond of ₹38 lakh with conditions: applicant must produce it as needed, cannot alter or sell it without court permission, and police must document its condition via photographs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts