Sandip Dagdu Shinde vs Maharashtra State Through Hupari Police Station, Hupari — 66/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 503. Disposed: Uncontested--ALLOWED / GRANTED AFTER FULL HEARING on 08th April 2026.

Cri.M.A. - Criminal Misc. Application

CNR: MHKO050010842026

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

07-03-2026

Filing Number

808/2026

Filing Date

07-03-2026

Registration No

66/2026

Registration Date

10-03-2026

Court

Civil Court Senior Division , Ichalkaranji

Judge

5-5th Jt.Civil Judge Jr. Dn. J.M.F.C. Ichalkaranji

Decision Date

08th April 2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--ALLOWED / GRANTED AFTER FULL HEARING

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 503

Petitioner(s)

Sandip Dagdu Shinde

Adv. SHAIKH IMRAN AYUB

Respondent(s)

Maharashtra State Through Hupari Police Station, Hupari

Hearing History

Judge: 5-5th Jt.Civil Judge Jr. Dn. J.M.F.C. Ichalkaranji

08-04-2026

Disposed

06-04-2026

Report

25-03-2026

Report

16-03-2026

Report

10-03-2026

First Order

Final Orders / Judgements

08-04-2026
Order on Exhibit

The court partly allowed the application under Sections 497 and 503 BNSS, granting interim possession of the seized VIVO mobile phone and Rs.2,700 cash to applicant Sandip Dagdu Shinde until trial conclusion, while rejecting return of the Aadhaar card as it was not seized. The court imposed strict conditions including an Rs.18,000 indemnity bond, prohibition on sale/transfer without court permission, mandatory production when directed, and required the IO to extract relevant data and prepare a panchnama with photographs before handover. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Interim Orders

casestatus.in Summary

The court partly allowed the application under Sections 497 and 503 BNSS, granting interim possession of the seized VIVO mobile phone and Rs.2,700 cash to applicant Sandip Dagdu Shinde until trial conclusion, while rejecting return of the Aadhaar card as it was not seized. The court imposed strict conditions including an Rs.18,000 indemnity bond, prohibition on sale/transfer without court permission, mandatory production when directed, and required the IO to extract relevant data and prepare a panchnama with photographs before handover. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

Civil Court Senior Division , Ichalkaranji All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case