Pushpa Arvind Khadatkar vs State of Maharashtra — 1269/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 503. Disposed: Uncontested--ALLOWED / GRANTED AFTER FULL HEARING on 23rd March 2026.

Cri.M.A.

CNR: MHNG030072792026

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

09-03-2026

Filing Number

7279/2026

Filing Date

09-03-2026

Registration No

1269/2026

Registration Date

10-03-2026

Court

Chief Judicial Magistrate , Nagpur

Judge

13-6th Jt. C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C.Nagpur

Decision Date

23rd March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--ALLOWED / GRANTED AFTER FULL HEARING

FIR Details

FIR Number

64

Police Station

Nandanwan

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 503

Petitioner(s)

Pushpa Arvind Khadatkar

Adv. GADGE MILIND ASHOK

Respondent(s)

State of Maharashtra

Hearing History

Judge: 13-6th Jt. C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C.Nagpur

23-03-2026

Disposed

16-03-2026

Reply/Say

10-03-2026

Reply/Say

Final Orders / Judgements

23-03-2026
Order on Exhibit

Summary: The court allowed Sau. Pushpa Khadatkar's application for release of her seized mobile handset (Redmi Note 11 Pro+, IMEI No. 860041056314183) seized in a gambling case. The court found her ownership prima facie established through tax invoice and Aadhaar card, and that retaining the device would cause damage without serving investigative purposes. The mobile was ordered released upon execution of a Rs. 20,000 indemnity bond, with conditions prohibiting sale or transfer without court permission and requiring production as directed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The court allowed Sau. Pushpa Khadatkar's application for release of her seized mobile handset (Redmi Note 11 Pro+, IMEI No. 860041056314183) seized in a gambling case. The court found her ownership prima facie established through tax invoice and Aadhaar card, and that retaining the device would cause damage without serving investigative purposes. The mobile was ordered released upon execution of a Rs. 20,000 indemnity bond, with conditions prohibiting sale or transfer without court permission and requiring production as directed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

Chief Judicial Magistrate , Nagpur All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case