Madhav Shivaji Kavthale vs The State of Maharashtra — 52/2025
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 503. Disposed: Uncontested--ALLOWED OTHERWISE on 26th May 2026.
Cri.M.A. - Criminal Misc. Application
CNR: MHLA160008402025
e-Filing Number
30-10-2025
Filing Number
463/2025
Filing Date
04-11-2025
Registration No
52/2025
Registration Date
07-11-2025
Court
Civil Court Junior Division, Deoni
Judge
1-CJJD and JMFC Deoni
Decision Date
26th May 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--ALLOWED OTHERWISE
FIR Details
FIR Number
250
Police Station
Police Station Deoni
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Madhav Shivaji Kavthale
Adv. Sasatte Balu M
Respondent(s)
The State of Maharashtra
Hearing History
Judge: 1-CJJD and JMFC Deoni
Disposed
Awaiting Notice
Awaiting Notice
Notice_Unready
Notice_Unready
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 26-05-2026 | Disposed |
| 13-05-2026 | Awaiting Notice |
| 05-05-2026 | Awaiting Notice |
| 23-04-2026 | Notice_Unready |
| 16-04-2026 | Notice_Unready |
Final Orders / Judgements
The court allowed Madhav Shivaji Kavthale's application for interim custody of his seized Bajaj RE-CNG auto (registration MH-24-AT-7983), finding him to be the registered owner with valid legal claim. The vehicle, seized in crime No. 250/2025, was returned to the applicant upon furnishing an indemnity bond of Rs. 3,00,000, with conditions that he cannot alter or dispose of the vehicle, must produce it when ordered, and must provide photographs of the vehicle for record. The court reasoned that police custody posed risk of deterioration without investigation necessity, and imposed conditions sufficient to ensure vehicle availability for trial. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
The court allowed Madhav Shivaji Kavthale's application for interim custody of his seized Bajaj RE-CNG auto (registration MH-24-AT-7983), finding him to be the registered owner with valid legal claim. The vehicle, seized in crime No. 250/2025, was returned to the applicant upon furnishing an indemnity bond of Rs. 3,00,000, with conditions that he cannot alter or dispose of the vehicle, must produce it when ordered, and must provide photographs of the vehicle for record. The court reasoned that police custody posed risk of deterioration without investigation necessity, and imposed conditions sufficient to ensure vehicle availability for trial. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts