Armaco Infralinks Private Limited through its proprietor Shubham Rajeshkumar Jain vs State of Maharashtra through PSO Parseoni Advocate - App — 54/2025

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 503. Disposed: Uncontested--ALLOWED OTHERWISE on 11th March 2026.

Case disposed

Cri.M.A.

CNR: MHNG140005102025

e-Filing Number

19-08-2025

Filing Number

476/2025

Filing Date

19-Aug-2025

Registration No

54/2025

Registration Date

19-Aug-2025

Court

Civil Court Junior Division , Parseoni

Judge

14-Civil Judge Jr.Dn J.M.F.C.Parshioni.

Decision Date

11-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--ALLOWED OTHERWISE

Last updated 12-May-2026

FIR Details

Police Station

Parshioni

Year

0

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 503

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Armaco Infralinks Private Limited through its proprietor Shubham Rajeshkumar Jain

    Adv. Shri. P. S. Sayare

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.State of Maharashtra through PSO Parseoni Advocate - App (Assistant Public Prosecutor)

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 11-Mar-2026

    Order on ExhibitView PDF

    Court Decision Summary The court allowed Armaco Infralinks' application for custody of the seized tipper vehicle. The Judicial Magistrate held that the applicant, as the registered owner with proper documentation, is entitled to interim custody on supratnama (bond). Despite prosecution concerns about insurance, non-cooperation, and risk of illegal sand transportation, the court found no sufficient grounds for rejection and noted that keeping the vehicle idle at the police station serves no useful purpose. The applicant must execute a ₹5 lakh indemnity bond and cannot alter the vehicle's nature or alienate it. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 11-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Civil Judge Jr.Dn J.M.F.C.Parshioni.

  4. 10-Mar-2026

    Order

    Civil Judge Jr.Dn J.M.F.C.Parshioni.

  5. 06-Mar-2026

    Order

    Civil Judge Jr.Dn J.M.F.C.Parshioni.

  6. 26-Feb-2026

    Order

    Civil Judge Jr.Dn J.M.F.C.Parshioni.

  7. 24-Feb-2026

    Order

    Civil Judge Jr.Dn J.M.F.C.Parshioni.

  8. 10-Feb-2026

    Order

    Civil Judge Jr.Dn J.M.F.C.Parshioni.

  9. 31-Jan-2026

    Order

    Civil Judge Jr.Dn J.M.F.C.Parshioni.

  10. 19-Jan-2026

    Order

    Civil Judge Jr.Dn J.M.F.C.Parshioni.

  11. 14-Jan-2026

    Order

    Civil Judge Jr.Dn J.M.F.C.Parshioni.

  12. 01-Jan-2026

    Order

    Civil Judge Jr.Dn J.M.F.C.Parshioni.

  13. 29-Dec-2025

    Order

    Civil Judge Jr.Dn J.M.F.C.Parshioni.

  14. 20-Dec-2025

    Order

    Civil Judge Jr.Dn J.M.F.C.Parshioni.

  15. 15-Dec-2025

    Order

    Civil Judge Jr.Dn J.M.F.C.Parshioni.

  16. 08-Dec-2025

    Order

    Civil Judge Jr.Dn J.M.F.C.Parshioni.

  17. 17-Oct-2025

    Order

    Civil Judge Jr.Dn J.M.F.C.Parshioni.

  18. 14-Oct-2025

    Order

    Civil Judge Jr.Dn J.M.F.C.Parshioni.

  19. 04-Oct-2025

    Order

    Civil Judge Jr.Dn J.M.F.C.Parshioni.

  20. 30-Sep-2025

    Order

    Civil Judge Jr.Dn J.M.F.C.Parshioni.

  21. 26-Sep-2025

    Order

    Civil Judge Jr.Dn J.M.F.C.Parshioni.

  22. 23-Sep-2025

    Order

    Civil Judge Jr.Dn J.M.F.C.Parshioni.

  23. 15-Sep-2025

    Order

    Civil Judge Jr.Dn J.M.F.C.Parshioni.

  24. 12-Sep-2025

    Order

    Civil Judge Jr.Dn J.M.F.C.Parshioni.

  25. 09-Sep-2025

    Order

    Civil Judge Jr.Dn J.M.F.C.Parshioni.

  26. 04-Sep-2025

    Order

    Civil Judge Jr.Dn J.M.F.C.Parshioni.

  27. 02-Sep-2025

    Order

    Civil Judge Jr.Dn J.M.F.C.Parshioni.

  28. 28-Aug-2025

    Order

    Civil Judge Jr.Dn J.M.F.C.Parshioni.

  29. 21-Aug-2025

    Reply/Say

    Civil Judge Jr.Dn J.M.F.C.Parshioni.

  30. 19-Aug-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  31. 19-Aug-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. 54/2025

casestatus.in Summary

Court Decision Summary The court allowed Armaco Infralinks' application for custody of the seized tipper vehicle. The Judicial Magistrate held that the applicant, as the registered owner with proper documentation, is entitled to interim custody on supratnama (bond). Despite prosecution concerns about insurance, non-cooperation, and risk of illegal sand transportation, the court found no sufficient grounds for rejection and noted that keeping the vehicle idle at the police station serves no useful purpose. The applicant must execute a ₹5 lakh indemnity bond and cannot alter the vehicle's nature or alienate it. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case