State of Maharashtra vs Kerba s/o Narsing Shinde and othr. U.T.P. 1 Advocate - Dure Gajanan B — 5/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 103(1),238,3(5). Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 28th May 2026 Date Not Updated.
Sessions Case
CNR: MHLA040000492026
Next Hearing
28th May 2026 Date Not Updated
Filing Number
26/2026
Filing Date
03-02-2026
Registration No
5/2026
Registration Date
03-02-2026
Court
Additional District Court, Ahmedpur
Judge
1-District Judge 1
FIR Details
FIR Number
724
Police Station
Ahmedpur
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State of Maharashtra
Adv. Patil Mahesh K_DGP11
Respondent(s)
Kerba s/o Narsing Shinde and othr. U.T.P. 1 Advocate - Dure Gajanan B
Narsing s/o Bhaurao Shinde
Adv. Dure Gajanan B
Hearing History
Judge: 1-District Judge 1
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 07-05-2026 | Evidence |
| 04-05-2026 | Evidence |
| 22-04-2026 | Evidence |
| 07-04-2026 | Evidence |
| 04-04-2026 | Evidence |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: Accused Kerba Narsing Shinde's bail application in a double murder case (Crime No. 724/2025, Ahmedpur police station) was rejected on 07.04.2026. Kerba and his father Narsing Shinde are charged with murdering Shivraj Surnar and Vishwanath Surnar under Sections 103(1) and 238 r/w Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The court found sufficient circumstantial evidence including call data records placing the accused near the crime scene, recovery of weapons pursuant to disclosure statements, and confessional statements, establishing complicity in the serious double homicide. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: Accused Kerba Narsing Shinde's bail application in a double murder case (Crime No. 724/2025, Ahmedpur police station) was rejected on 07.04.2026. Kerba and his father Narsing Shinde are charged with murdering Shivraj Surnar and Vishwanath Surnar under Sections 103(1) and 238 r/w Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The court found sufficient circumstantial evidence including call data records placing the accused near the crime scene, recovery of weapons pursuant to disclosure statements, and confessional statements, establishing complicity in the serious double homicide. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts