State of Maharashtra Through Ajara Police Station vs Ajinkya Sandesh Thakur Advocate - L. P. Patil — 129/2025
Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 316(2),318(2),318(4),336(2),336(3),340(2),3(5). Status: Production of Accused. Next hearing: 18th May 2026.
R.C.C. - Regular Criminal Case
CNR: MHKO150008602025
Next Hearing
18th May 2026
e-Filing Number
16-10-2025
Filing Number
738/2025
Filing Date
17-10-2025
Registration No
129/2025
Registration Date
17-10-2025
Court
Civil and Criminal Court , Ajara
Judge
1-C.J.J.D. and J.M.F.C. Ajara
FIR Details
FIR Number
220
Police Station
Police Station Ajara.
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State of Maharashtra Through Ajara Police Station
Adv. A. P. P.
Respondent(s)
Ajinkya Sandesh Thakur Advocate - L. P. Patil
Farahan Ibrahim Shaikh
Adv. null
Hearing History
Judge: 1-C.J.J.D. and J.M.F.C. Ajara
Production of Accused
Production of Accused
Production of Accused
Production of Accused
Production of Accused
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 05-05-2026 | Production of Accused | |
| 02-05-2026 | Production of Accused | |
| 27-04-2026 | Production of Accused | |
| 21-04-2026 | Production of Accused | |
| 07-04-2026 | Production of Accused |
Interim Orders
Summary: The application of Accused No. 1 has been allowed. The court modified the bail conditions by permitting the accused to furnish a personal bond (P.B.) of Rs. 50,000 and cash security of Rs. 30,000 instead of a solvent surety, recognizing his inability to secure surety while incarcerated. The accused must furnish a solvent surety after release and refund the cash security; failure to attend two consecutive trial dates will result in forfeiture of the cash security to the State. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: The application of Accused No. 1 has been allowed. The court modified the bail conditions by permitting the accused to furnish a personal bond (P.B.) of Rs. 50,000 and cash security of Rs. 30,000 instead of a solvent surety, recognizing his inability to secure surety while incarcerated. The accused must furnish a solvent surety after release and refund the cash security; failure to attend two consecutive trial dates will result in forfeiture of the cash security to the State. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts