Vinayak Ashok Sangavkar vs The State Of Maharashtra Chandgad police station — 17/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 482. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED / GRANTED AFTER FULL HEARING on 02nd April 2026.

Cri.Bail Appln. - Bail Application

CNR: MHKO080001432026

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

13-03-2026

Filing Number

49/2026

Filing Date

13-03-2026

Registration No

17/2026

Registration Date

13-03-2026

Court

Add District Court , Gadhinglaj

Judge

1-District Judge-1 Addl. Sessions Judge Gadhinglaj

Decision Date

02nd April 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED / GRANTED AFTER FULL HEARING

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 482

Petitioner(s)

Vinayak Ashok Sangavkar

Adv. Manisha U. Kanade

Respondent(s)

The State Of Maharashtra Chandgad police station

Hearing History

Judge: 1-District Judge-1 Addl. Sessions Judge Gadhinglaj

02-04-2026

Disposed

27-03-2026

Hearing

17-03-2026

Hearing

16-03-2026

Notice_Unready

13-03-2026

Notice_Unready

Final Orders / Judgements

02-04-2026
Order on Exhibit

Case Summary: 17/2026 The court granted anticipatory bail to accused Vinayak Ashok Sangaonkar in a fraud case (IPC §420) involving alleged non-repayment of Rs. 10 lakhs. The court found that custodial interrogation was not justified due to the three-year delay between the 2023 transaction and 2026 FIR filing, lack of direct evidence linking the applicant to receiving funds, and the complainant's status as a merchant who invested for trading profits. Bail was granted subject to weekly police station reporting and document production. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Interim Orders

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: 17/2026 The court granted anticipatory bail to accused Vinayak Ashok Sangaonkar in a fraud case (IPC §420) involving alleged non-repayment of Rs. 10 lakhs. The court found that custodial interrogation was not justified due to the three-year delay between the 2023 transaction and 2026 FIR filing, lack of direct evidence linking the applicant to receiving funds, and the complainant's status as a merchant who invested for trading profits. Bail was granted subject to weekly police station reporting and document production. 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

Add District Court , Gadhinglaj All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case