State of Maharashtra vs Archana w/o Parshant, Gaikwad Advocate - Hippargekar Nagesh A — 10/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 103(1). Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 05th August 2026.
Sessions Case
CNR: MHLA040000782026
Filing Number
47/2026
Filing Date
24-Feb-2026
Registration No
10/2026
Registration Date
24-Feb-2026
Court
Additional District Court, Ahmedpur
Judge
1-District Judge 1
Last updated 03-Jun-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
822
Police Station
Ahmedpur
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.State of Maharashtra
Adv. Patil Mahesh K_DGP11
Respondent(s)
-
1.Archana w/o Parshant, Gaikwad Advocate - Hippargekar Nagesh A
Case History
-
05-Aug-2026
Next hearingPending
-
20-May-2026
Evidence
District Judge 1
-
30-Apr-2026
Evidence
District Judge 1
-
16-Mar-2026
Hearing
District Judge 1
-
13-Mar-2026
Copy of JudgmentView PDF
Case Summary: State of Maharashtra v. Archana Gaikwad (10/2026) Bail was GRANTED to accused Archana Prashant Gaikwad on March 13, 2026. Archana was charged under Section 103(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (murder) in the death of her husband Prashant Gaikwad. The court found that while matrimonial discord and head injury existed, the circumstantial evidence—including the deceased's intoxication and lack of premeditation—indicated culpable homicide rather than murder, warranting bail on a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with equal surety. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
13-Mar-2026
Hearing
District Judge 1
-
12-Mar-2026
Order on Exh
District Judge 1
-
11-Mar-2026
Argument on Exh.____Unready
District Judge 1
-
06-Mar-2026
Argument on Exh.____Unready
District Judge 1
-
04-Mar-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
24-Feb-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 10/2026
Case Summary: State of Maharashtra v. Archana Gaikwad (10/2026) Bail was GRANTED to accused Archana Prashant Gaikwad on March 13, 2026. Archana was charged under Section 103(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (murder) in the death of her husband Prashant Gaikwad. The court found that while matrimonial discord and head injury existed, the circumstantial evidence—including the deceased's intoxication and lack of premeditation—indicated culpable homicide rather than murder, warranting bail on a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with equal surety. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts