State Ambad Police stn Nashik vs Sham Ashok Angre — 339/2025

Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 137(2), 64(1). Status: Evidence Part Heard. Next hearing: 13th May 2026.

Spl.Case - Special Case (Sessions)

CNR: MHNS010083322025

Evidence Part Heard

Next Hearing

13th May 2026

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

4020/2025

Filing Date

11-12-2025

Registration No

339/2025

Registration Date

11-12-2025

Court

District and Sessions Court , Nashik

Judge

10-DISTRICT JUDGE-5 AND ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE, NASHIK

FIR Details

FIR Number

710

Police Station

AMBAD POLICE STATION

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 137(2), 64(1)
The Protection of Children from Sexual Offence Act, 2012 Section 4, 8, 12

Petitioner(s)

State Ambad Police stn Nashik

Adv. App Sonawane Shailesh H

Respondent(s)

Sham Ashok Angre

Hearing History

Judge: 10-DISTRICT JUDGE-5 AND ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE, NASHIK

23-04-2026

Evidence Part Heard

22-04-2026

Evidence Part Heard

08-04-2026

Evidence Part Heard

27-03-2026

Evidence Part Heard

10-03-2026

Evidence Part Heard

Interim Orders

08-01-2026
Order on Exhibit

BAIL DENIED The Special (POCSO) Judge at Nashik rejected the bail application of 19-year-old Sham Ashok Angre in a case involving alleged penetrative sexual assault on a 17-year-old minor. The court found the victim's statement credible, establishing forceful sexual assault rather than a consensual relationship, and noted that granting bail posed a risk of threat or inducement to the minor victim. This was the accused's second bail application, with no material change in circumstances since the first rejection. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

BAIL DENIED The Special (POCSO) Judge at Nashik rejected the bail application of 19-year-old Sham Ashok Angre in a case involving alleged penetrative sexual assault on a 17-year-old minor. The court found the victim's statement credible, establishing forceful sexual assault rather than a consensual relationship, and noted that granting bail posed a risk of threat or inducement to the minor victim. This was the accused's second bail application, with no material change in circumstances since the first rejection. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

District and Sessions Court , Nashik All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case