Shivaji Pundlik Jagatap vs State Excise Flying Squad 2 Satana — 70/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 503. Disposed: Uncontested--DECREED on 17th March 2026.

Case disposed

Cri.M.A. - Criminal Misc. Application

CNR: MHNS190003372026

e-Filing Number

24-02-2026

Filing Number

273/2026

Filing Date

25-Feb-2026

Registration No

70/2026

Registration Date

25-Feb-2026

Court

Civil and Criminal Court ,Yeola

Judge

2-Joint CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC

Decision Date

17-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--DECREED

Last updated 18-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 503

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Shivaji Pundlik Jagatap

    Adv. PRAVIN A. SHINDE

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.State Excise Flying Squad 2 Satana

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 17-Mar-2026

    Order on ExhibitView PDF

    The court allowed Shivaji Pundlik Jagatap's application for interim custody of his seized iPhone-17, finding he established ownership through FIR copy, purchase invoice, and Aadhar card. The court granted release subject to conditions: Rs. 70,000 indemnity bond, photographic documentation, prohibition on sale or modification, and undertaking to produce the device as directed and refrain from similar offences under the Maharashtra Prohibition Act, 1949. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 17-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Joint CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC

  4. 16-Mar-2026

    Reply/Say

    Joint CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC

  5. 06-Mar-2026

    Reply/Say

    Joint CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC

  6. 26-Feb-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  7. 25-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 70/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The court allowed Shivaji Pundlik Jagatap's application for interim custody of his seized iPhone-17, finding he established ownership through FIR copy, purchase invoice, and Aadhar card. The court granted release subject to conditions: Rs. 70,000 indemnity bond, photographic documentation, prohibition on sale or modification, and undertaking to produce the device as directed and refrain from similar offences under the Maharashtra Prohibition Act, 1949. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case