State of Maharashtra through PSO Parseoni vs Rupesh Chintaman Kohde — 140/2024

Case under Foreigners Act Section 3,4,5. Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 16th June 2026.

R.C.C. - Reg.Cri.Case

CNR: MHNG140006902024

Evidence

Next Hearing

16th June 2026

Filing Number

608/2024

Filing Date

30-12-2024

Registration No

140/2024

Registration Date

30-12-2024

Court

Civil Court Junior Division , Parseoni

Judge

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

FIR Details

FIR Number

87

Police Station

Parshioni

Year

2024

Acts & Sections

FOREIGNERS ACT Section 3,4,5
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 34

Petitioner(s)

State of Maharashtra through PSO Parseoni

Adv. App

Respondent(s)

Rupesh Chintaman Kohde

Ramuji @Ramdas Gunderao Kakde

Hearing History

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

18-04-2026

Evidence

10-03-2026

Evidence

03-02-2026

Evidence

16-12-2025

Evidence

18-11-2025

Evidence

Interim Orders

14-10-2025
Evidence

This document is a court record of witness examination in a human trafficking case (Case No. 140/2024) from a Nagpur court, dated 14/10/2025. The witness, a Bangladeshi woman, testified about being trafficked to work in a hotel where she was allegedly forced into sex work, describing how she was recruited and brought to Itagav through intermediaries. During cross-examination, the witness retracted many of her statements, claiming she didn't remember key details and that the prosecution may have suggested certain facts to her during police interrogation, ultimately denying the alleged incidents occurred. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

This document is a court record of witness examination in a human trafficking case (Case No. 140/2024) from a Nagpur court, dated 14/10/2025. The witness, a Bangladeshi woman, testified about being trafficked to work in a hotel where she was allegedly forced into sex work, describing how she was recruited and brought to Itagav through intermediaries. During cross-examination, the witness retracted many of her statements, claiming she didn't remember key details and that the prosecution may have suggested certain facts to her during police interrogation, ultimately denying the alleged incidents occurred. 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

Civil Court Junior Division , Parseoni All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case