The State Of Maharashtra-Gadhinglaj Police Station vs Sidhnath Sudam Gaikwad etc 3 Advocate - A. V. Ghatage (Shendure) — 35/2018
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 454,457,380,34. Status: Awaiting Warrant. Next hearing: 12th May 2026.
R.C.C. - Regular Criminal Case
CNR: MHKO100003342018
Next Hearing
12th May 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
270/2018
Filing Date
30-05-2018
Registration No
35/2018
Registration Date
30-05-2018
Court
Civil and Criminal Court, Gadhinglaj
Judge
2-2nd Civil Judge Jr.Dn.and J.M.F.C.,Gadhinglaj
FIR Details
FIR Number
39
Police Station
Gadhinglaj Police Station
Year
2018
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
The State Of Maharashtra-Gadhinglaj Police Station
Adv. A. P. P.
Respondent(s)
Sidhnath Sudam Gaikwad etc 3 Advocate - A. V. Ghatage (Shendure)
Suraj Tanaji Kale
Adv. A. V. Ghatage (Shendure)
Mininath alias Anna alias Arjun alias Vahid Vishwmbhar Gaikwad
Adv. A. V. Ghatage (Shendure)
Hearing History
Judge: 2-2nd Civil Judge Jr.Dn.and J.M.F.C.,Gadhinglaj
Awaiting Warrant
Awaiting Warrant
Awaiting Warrant
Awaiting Warrant
Awaiting Warrant
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 10-03-2026 | Awaiting Warrant | |
| 20-01-2026 | Awaiting Warrant | |
| 20-11-2025 | Awaiting Warrant | |
| 11-09-2025 | Awaiting Warrant | |
| 18-07-2025 | Awaiting Warrant |
Interim Orders
Case Summary Accused No. 3 Mininath @ Anna @ Arjun @ Vahid Vishwambhar Gaikwad was acquitted of charges under sections 454, 457, and 380 IPC (lurking house trespass and theft of temple ornaments worth ₹2,68,000). The court found that while co-accused nos. 1 and 2 confessed and recovered stolen gold and silver items, no direct evidence or recovered articles linked accused no. 3 to the crime, and the confessional statements of other accused were inadmissible against him under the Indian Evidence Act. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary Accused No. 3 Mininath @ Anna @ Arjun @ Vahid Vishwambhar Gaikwad was acquitted of charges under sections 454, 457, and 380 IPC (lurking house trespass and theft of temple ornaments worth ₹2,68,000). The court found that while co-accused nos. 1 and 2 confessed and recovered stolen gold and silver items, no direct evidence or recovered articles linked accused no. 3 to the crime, and the confessional statements of other accused were inadmissible against him under the Indian Evidence Act. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts