Haji Abdul Kayum Haji Abdul Rajjak through power of attorney holder Sheetalsingh Ramlakhan Rath vs State Of Maharastra Through Police Station Mouda Advocate - B.M. Bhagat — 24/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 503. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED / GRANTED AFTER FULL HEARING on 10th March 2026.
Cri.M.A.
CNR: MHNG160002712026
e-Filing Number
01-03-2026
Filing Number
247/2026
Filing Date
02-03-2026
Registration No
24/2026
Registration Date
02-03-2026
Court
Civil Court Junior Division , Mouda
Judge
1-Civil Judge Jr. Dn. J.M.F.C. Mouda
Decision Date
10th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ALLOWED / GRANTED AFTER FULL HEARING
FIR Details
FIR Number
174
Police Station
Mouda
Year
2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Haji Abdul Kayum Haji Abdul Rajjak through power of attorney holder Sheetalsingh Ramlakhan Rath
Adv. SANGADIKAR PRAMOD BHOJRAJ
Respondent(s)
State Of Maharastra Through Police Station Mouda Advocate - B.M. Bhagat
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Civil Judge Jr. Dn. J.M.F.C. Mouda
Disposed
Hearing
Reply/Say
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 10-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 07-03-2026 | Hearing |
| 02-03-2026 | Reply/Say |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary The court allowed Haji Abdul's application to release his seized TATA vehicle (used in transporting 29 cattle without proper food, water, or medical care), but imposed strict conditions including an indemnity bond of Rs. 35 lakh and Rs. 200 per day per animal payment to the Gaushala (animal welfare organization). The applicant must produce the vehicle as directed by the court and cannot sell, mortgage, or structurally alter it. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary The court allowed Haji Abdul's application to release his seized TATA vehicle (used in transporting 29 cattle without proper food, water, or medical care), but imposed strict conditions including an indemnity bond of Rs. 35 lakh and Rs. 200 per day per animal payment to the Gaushala (animal welfare organization). The applicant must produce the vehicle as directed by the court and cannot sell, mortgage, or structurally alter it. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts