Dipak Bhagchand Bahure vs State of Maharashtra Through Police station Ambad Advocate - APP — 237/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 482. Disposed: Contested--REJECTED on 28th May 2026.
Cri.Bail Appln. - Bail Application
CNR: MHJN110005012026
e-Filing Number
15-05-2026
Filing Number
355/2026
Filing Date
15-May-2026
Registration No
237/2026
Registration Date
15-May-2026
Court
District and Additional Sessions Court , Ambad
Judge
1-District Judge-1 and Additional Sessions Judge Ambad
Decision Date
28-May-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--REJECTED
Last updated 16-Jul-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
214
Police Station
Ambad
Year
2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Dipak Bhagchand Bahure
Adv. SHARMA K N
Respondent(s)
-
1.State of Maharashtra Through Police station Ambad Advocate - APP (Assistant Public Prosecutor)
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
28-May-2026
Order on Exhibit
Summary of Case 237/2026 The Additional Sessions Judge rejected Dipak Bhagchand Bahure's anticipatory bail application, finding the allegations of serious nature—specifically that he forcibly abducted a victim girl on his motorcycle and threatened her mother. The court held that while co-accused received anticipatory bail due to their different roles, the applicant as the main accused was not entitled to pre-arrest bail given the gravity of the charges under BNS sections 137(2), 74, 75, 78, 351(2)(3), and 3(5). This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
28-May-2026
Disposed
District Judge-1 and Additional Sessions Judge Ambad
-
26-May-2026
Arguments
District Judge-1 and Additional Sessions Judge Ambad
-
22-May-2026
Say / Hearing on Exh____Ready
District Judge-1 and Additional Sessions Judge Ambad
-
15-May-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
15-May-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 237/2026
Summary of Case 237/2026 The Additional Sessions Judge rejected Dipak Bhagchand Bahure's anticipatory bail application, finding the allegations of serious nature—specifically that he forcibly abducted a victim girl on his motorcycle and threatened her mother. The court held that while co-accused received anticipatory bail due to their different roles, the applicant as the main accused was not entitled to pre-arrest bail given the gravity of the charges under BNS sections 137(2), 74, 75, 78, 351(2)(3), and 3(5). This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts