NANKESHWAR MOHANLAL UEKEY vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA — 25/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 503. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED / GRANTED AFTER FULL HEARING on 12th March 2026.
Cri.M.A.
CNR: MHNG180004522026
e-Filing Number
05-03-2026
Filing Number
414/2026
Filing Date
05-03-2026
Registration No
25/2026
Registration Date
05-03-2026
Court
Civil Court Junior Division , Kalmeshwar
Judge
1-CIVIL JUDGE JR.DN. JMFC KALMESHWAR
Decision Date
12th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ALLOWED / GRANTED AFTER FULL HEARING
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
NANKESHWAR MOHANLAL UEKEY
Adv. Nivedita Kailashrao Bhadange
Respondent(s)
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
Hearing History
Judge: 1-CIVIL JUDGE JR.DN. JMFC KALMESHWAR
Disposed
Reply/Say
Reply/Say
Reply/Say
Reply/Say
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 12-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 11-03-2026 | Reply/Say |
| 10-03-2026 | Reply/Say |
| 09-03-2026 | Reply/Say |
| 07-03-2026 | Reply/Say |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The court allowed the applicant's application under Section 503 of the BNSS 2023 to recover his seized mobile phone. The court found the applicant established ownership through mobile bills and reasoned that prolonged police custody risked property deterioration without serving investigative purposes. The mobile was released on an indemnity bond of Rs. 20,000 with strict conditions: the applicant cannot sell, modify, or transfer it without court permission, must preserve it, produce it when directed, and cannot use it for gambling activities. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
Summary The court allowed the applicant's application under Section 503 of the BNSS 2023 to recover his seized mobile phone. The court found the applicant established ownership through mobile bills and reasoned that prolonged police custody risked property deterioration without serving investigative purposes. The mobile was released on an indemnity bond of Rs. 20,000 with strict conditions: the applicant cannot sell, modify, or transfer it without court permission, must preserve it, produce it when directed, and cannot use it for gambling activities. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts