Santosh Derha Sarbarsathi vs State of Maharashtra through Kalmana Police Station — 1288/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 503. Disposed: Uncontested--ALLOWED / GRANTED AFTER FULL HEARING on 27th March 2026.
Cri.M.A.
CNR: MHNG030074982026
e-Filing Number
10-03-2026
Filing Number
7498/2026
Filing Date
11-Mar-2026
Registration No
1288/2026
Registration Date
11-Mar-2026
Court
Chief Judicial Magistrate , Nagpur
Judge
14-16th Jt. C.J.J. D. J.M.F.C Nagpur
Decision Date
27-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--ALLOWED / GRANTED AFTER FULL HEARING
Last updated 24-May-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
282
Police Station
Kalamna
Year
2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Santosh Derha Sarbarsathi
Adv. SARAF NAKUL NITIN
Respondent(s)
-
1.State of Maharashtra through Kalmana Police Station
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
27-Mar-2026
Order on ExhibitView PDF
Summary The Nagpur First Class Magistrate Court granted interim custody of seized gold mangalsutra ornaments (8.83 grams) valued at ₹1,30,000 to applicant Santosh Derha, ordering release upon submission of an indemnity bond and strict conditions prohibiting any alteration, transfer, or sale of the items. The court found the applicant entitled to interim custody based on documentary evidence and the investigating officer's confirmation that no other claims existed for the seized property. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
27-Mar-2026
Disposed
16th Jt. C.J.J. D. J.M.F.C Nagpur
-
25-Mar-2026
Order
16th Jt. C.J.J. D. J.M.F.C Nagpur
-
20-Mar-2026
Reply/Say
16th Jt. C.J.J. D. J.M.F.C Nagpur
-
17-Mar-2026
Reply/Say
16th Jt. C.J.J. D. J.M.F.C Nagpur
-
12-Mar-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
11-Mar-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 1288/2026
Summary The Nagpur First Class Magistrate Court granted interim custody of seized gold mangalsutra ornaments (8.83 grams) valued at ₹1,30,000 to applicant Santosh Derha, ordering release upon submission of an indemnity bond and strict conditions prohibiting any alteration, transfer, or sale of the items. The court found the applicant entitled to interim custody based on documentary evidence and the investigating officer's confirmation that no other claims existed for the seized property. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts