The State of Maharashtra Tarfe Chandoli Rastrya Udhayan vs Dagadu Gangaram Bodake etc 3 Advocate - A. A. Patil — 2100037/2015
Case under Wild Life (Protection) Act Section 34(a)1,27,30,35. Status: N.B.W._Ready. Next hearing: 17th July 2026.
R.C.C. - Regular Criminal Case
CNR: MHKO160002472015
Next Hearing
17th July 2026
Filing Number
210037/2015
Filing Date
02-05-2015
Registration No
2100037/2015
Registration Date
02-05-2015
Court
Civil and Criminal Court , Malkapur Shauwadi
Judge
1-Civil Judge Junior Division Malkapur-Shahuwadi.
FIR Details
FIR Number
02
Police Station
Shahuwadi Police Station
Year
2013
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
The State of Maharashtra Tarfe Chandoli Rastrya Udhayan
Adv. A. P. P.
Respondent(s)
Dagadu Gangaram Bodake etc 3 Advocate - A. A. Patil
Gangaram Dhavu Bodake
Adv. A. A. Patil
Dhondiba Gangaram Bodake
Adv. A. A. Patil
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Civil Judge Junior Division Malkapur-Shahuwadi.
N.B.W._Ready
N.B.W._Ready
N.B.W._Ready
N.B.W._Ready
N.B.W._Ready
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 29-05-2026 | N.B.W._Ready |
| 08-04-2026 | N.B.W._Ready |
| 16-03-2026 | N.B.W._Ready |
| 20-01-2026 | N.B.W._Ready |
| 24-12-2025 | N.B.W._Ready |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: Reg.Cri.Case No.37/2015 Court: Judicial Magistrate First Class, Malkapur-Shahuwadi Decided: 30/11/2017 Outcome: Accused Dagadu Gangaram Bodake and Dhondiba Gangaram Bodake convicted under Sections 27 and 34(A) of the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972 (punishable under Section 51(1-C)). Each sentenced to 3 years rigorous imprisonment and ₹50,000 fine. Acquitted of charges under Sections 30 and 35 due to insufficient evidence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: Reg.Cri.Case No.37/2015 Court: Judicial Magistrate First Class, Malkapur-Shahuwadi Decided: 30/11/2017 Outcome: Accused Dagadu Gangaram Bodake and Dhondiba Gangaram Bodake convicted under Sections 27 and 34(A) of the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972 (punishable under Section 51(1-C)). Each sentenced to 3 years rigorous imprisonment and ₹50,000 fine. Acquitted of charges under Sections 30 and 35 due to insufficient evidence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts