Niranjan uttam chavhan vs State of Maharashtra through police station killari — 21/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 503. Disposed: Uncontested--ALLOWED OTHERWISE on 24th March 2026.
Cri.M.A. - Criminal Misc. Application
CNR: MHLA140004432026
e-Filing Number
12-02-2026
Filing Number
148/2026
Filing Date
12-02-2026
Registration No
21/2026
Registration Date
13-02-2026
Court
Civil Court Junior Division , Ausa
Judge
3-3rd Jt. Civil Judge J.D. and J.M.F.C, Ausa
Decision Date
24th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--ALLOWED OTHERWISE
FIR Details
Police Station
Police StationKillari.
Year
0
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Niranjan uttam chavhan
Adv. KUSUMKAR GAJANAN HARIBHAU
Respondent(s)
State of Maharashtra through police station killari
Hearing History
Judge: 3-3rd Jt. Civil Judge J.D. and J.M.F.C, Ausa
Disposed
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Filing of Say on Exh___Unready
Filing of Say on Exh___Unready
Filing of Say on Exh___Unready
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 24-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 23-03-2026 | Argument on Exh.____Unready |
| 20-03-2026 | Filing of Say on Exh___Unready |
| 16-03-2026 | Filing of Say on Exh___Unready |
| 13-03-2026 | Filing of Say on Exh___Unready |
Final Orders / Judgements
The court partially allowed Niranjan Uttam Chavan's application for interim custody of his seized Bajaj Pulsar motorcycle under Section 503 BNSS, releasing the vehicle pending trial conclusion upon furnishing a ₹1,25,000 indemnity bond and compliance with conditions (valid insurance, non-transfer, production when required). However, the court rejected the mobile phone's release, as the investigating officer had not yet obtained its CDR report, deeming it essential for investigation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The court partially allowed Niranjan Uttam Chavan's application for interim custody of his seized Bajaj Pulsar motorcycle under Section 503 BNSS, releasing the vehicle pending trial conclusion upon furnishing a ₹1,25,000 indemnity bond and compliance with conditions (valid insurance, non-transfer, production when required). However, the court rejected the mobile phone's release, as the investigating officer had not yet obtained its CDR report, deeming it essential for investigation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts