The State of Maharashtra Through Saswad P.Stn. vs Pradip Bhaiyyalal Bisen etc Advocate - Adv. G.S. Limbekar — 1125/2023

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 395,392,34. Status: Awaiting Muddemal. Next hearing: 11th April 2026.

Sessions Case

CNR: MHPU010184102023

Awaiting Muddemal

Next Hearing

11th April 2026

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

10767/2023

Filing Date

06-11-2023

Registration No

1125/2023

Registration Date

08-11-2023

Court

District and Session Court ,Pune

Judge

17-DISTRICT JUDGE - 1 AND ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE PUNE

FIR Details

FIR Number

174

Police Station

Saswad Police Station

Year

2023

Acts & Sections

INDIAN PENAL CODE Section 395,392,34
Arms Act Section 3,25

Petitioner(s)

The State of Maharashtra Through Saswad P.Stn.

Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

Pradip Bhaiyyalal Bisen etc Advocate - Adv. G.S. Limbekar

Pavan Jagdish Vishwakarma

Subhash Bandu Meshram (C.R.P.C.

Vishnu Pandit Alias Vidanvasani Pande (CRPC

Manish Bechan Kumar (C.R.P.C.

Hearing History

Judge: 17-DISTRICT JUDGE - 1 AND ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE PUNE

27-03-2026

Awaiting Muddemal

07-03-2026

Awaiting Muddemal

20-02-2026

Awaiting Muddemal

05-02-2026

Awaiting Muddemal

22-01-2026

Awaiting Muddemal

Interim Orders

15-05-2024
Order on Exhibit

Summary: The bail application filed by accused Pradip Bhaiyyalal Bisen for offences under IPC Sections 392, 395, 34 and Arms Act Section 3(25) was rejected/denied. The court found that the accused, involved in armed robbery and dacoity cases, posed a flight risk (being a resident of Gondia) and a danger of repeating crimes; moreover, with only 13 prosecution witnesses, trial could conclude promptly, making continued detention appropriate. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The bail application filed by accused Pradip Bhaiyyalal Bisen for offences under IPC Sections 392, 395, 34 and Arms Act Section 3(25) was rejected/denied. The court found that the accused, involved in armed robbery and dacoity cases, posed a flight risk (being a resident of Gondia) and a danger of repeating crimes; moreover, with only 13 prosecution witnesses, trial could conclude promptly, making continued detention appropriate. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

District and Session Court ,Pune All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case