Yogesh Sajan Deore vs State Thr Satana Police Station — 151/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 482. Disposed: Contested--BAIL GRANTED on 10th March 2026.
Cri.Bail Appln. - Bail Application
CNR: MHNS070003242026
e-Filing Number
29-01-2026
Filing Number
245/2026
Filing Date
30-01-2026
Registration No
151/2026
Registration Date
30-01-2026
Court
District Court-1 ,Malegaon
Judge
3-District Judge-5 and Additional Sessions Judge, Malegaon
Decision Date
10th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--BAIL GRANTED
FIR Details
FIR Number
607
Police Station
SATANA POLICE STATION
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Yogesh Sajan Deore
Adv. SMITAL RAMESHRAO PATIL
Dilip Ramchandra Deore
Adv. SMITAL RAMESHRAO PATIL
Respondent(s)
State Thr Satana Police Station
Hearing History
Judge: 3-District Judge-5 and Additional Sessions Judge, Malegaon
Disposed
Order
Order
Arguments
Arguments
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 10-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 07-03-2026 | Order | |
| 02-03-2026 | Order | |
| 24-02-2026 | Arguments | |
| 13-02-2026 | Arguments |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The Additional Sessions Court granted anticipatory bail to applicants Yogesh Sajan Deore and Dilip Ramchandra Deore in a land dispute case involving allegations of forged document and cheating. The court found that while a forged agreement-to-sale document was allegedly used, the applicants had openly produced it before revenue officers during a cultivation inquiry, and a Tahsildar's judgment dated 2.5.2025 had already recognized their occupation rights over the disputed land—suggesting the matter is essentially civil in nature rather than criminal. The court released them on bail with conditions including Rs. 50,000 bond each and monthly police station attendance. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The Additional Sessions Court granted anticipatory bail to applicants Yogesh Sajan Deore and Dilip Ramchandra Deore in a land dispute case involving allegations of forged document and cheating. The court found that while a forged agreement-to-sale document was allegedly used, the applicants had openly produced it before revenue officers during a cultivation inquiry, and a Tahsildar's judgment dated 2.5.2025 had already recognized their occupation rights over the disputed land—suggesting the matter is essentially civil in nature rather than criminal. The court released them on bail with conditions including Rs. 50,000 bond each and monthly police station attendance. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts