The State of Maharashtra Through Sahakar Nagar Police Station vs Krushna Kondiba Shimple etc. — 2/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 64,64(2)(f),70,351(2)(3),3(5). Status: Charge. Next hearing: 13th April 2026.

Sessions Case

CNR: MHPU010207402025

Charge

Next Hearing

13th April 2026

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

13537/2025

Filing Date

29-12-2025

Registration No

2/2026

Registration Date

01-01-2026

Court

District and Session Court ,Pune

Judge

12-DISTRICT JUDGE -8 AND ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE PUNE

FIR Details

FIR Number

4

Police Station

Sahakarnagar Police Station

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 64,64(2)(f),70,351(2)(3),3(5)

Petitioner(s)

The State of Maharashtra Through Sahakar Nagar Police Station

Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

Krushna Kondiba Shimple etc.

Navnath Limbaji Dugane

Adv. Salave Manuja Ramesh

Hearing History

Judge: 12-DISTRICT JUDGE -8 AND ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE PUNE

24-03-2026

Charge

23-03-2026

Order

10-03-2026

Argument on Exh.____Unready

07-03-2026

Reply/Say

04-03-2026

Reply/Say

Interim Orders

24-03-2026
Order on Exhibit

SUMMARY: Accused No. 2 Navnath Limbaji Dugane's bail application in a gang rape case (Crime No. 4/2025, Sahkarnagar Police Station, Pune) was granted. The court ordered his release on regular bail with a PR bond of Rs. 50,000 and surety of equal amount, imposing stringent conditions including no contact with the victim/witnesses, non-tampering with evidence, and restrictions on leaving Maharashtra without permission. The court considered case pendency, similar role to co-accused already released by High Court, and lack of independent witnesses in making this decision. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

SUMMARY: Accused No. 2 Navnath Limbaji Dugane's bail application in a gang rape case (Crime No. 4/2025, Sahkarnagar Police Station, Pune) was granted. The court ordered his release on regular bail with a PR bond of Rs. 50,000 and surety of equal amount, imposing stringent conditions including no contact with the victim/witnesses, non-tampering with evidence, and restrictions on leaving Maharashtra without permission. The court considered case pendency, similar role to co-accused already released by High Court, and lack of independent witnesses in making this decision. 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