State OF Maharashtra vs Ganesh Kondiba Thombare Advocate - Wagh Sachin Sudhakar — 8/2019

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 307,341,324,504,506,34. Status: Evidence Part Heard. Next hearing: 13th April 2026.

Sessions Case

CNR: MHPU140001622019

Evidence Part Heard

Next Hearing

13th April 2026

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

27/2019

Filing Date

09-01-2019

Registration No

8/2019

Registration Date

19-01-2019

Court

Additional District Court, Baramati

Judge

4-DISTRICT JUDGE-2 AND ADDL. SESSION JUDGE BARAMATI

FIR Details

FIR Number

455

Police Station

BARAMATI TALUKA P.S.

Year

2018

Acts & Sections

INDIAN PENAL CODE Section 307,341,324,504,506,34

Petitioner(s)

State OF Maharashtra

Adv. Navale Kamalakar Shankarrao

Respondent(s)

Ganesh Kondiba Thombare Advocate - Wagh Sachin Sudhakar

Sampat @ Vishal Kondiba Thombare

Akshay Najya Bajirao Jadhav

Kondiba Bhairu Thombare

Hearing History

Judge: 4-DISTRICT JUDGE-2 AND ADDL. SESSION JUDGE BARAMATI

01-04-2026

Evidence Part Heard

23-03-2026

Evidence Part Heard

07-03-2026

Evidence Part Heard

11-02-2026

Evidence Part Heard

22-01-2026

Evidence Part Heard

Interim Orders

13-03-2019
Issues
24-03-2025
Order on Exhibit

SUMMARY: The application filed by accused No. 1 and 3 to relax bail conditions (prohibiting entry into Baramati Taluka and weekly police reporting) imposed on 26/06/2024 has been rejected. The court upheld the strict conditions citing that the accused had initially undertaken not to enter the victim's village until trial completion, and the conditions mirror those imposed by the Bombay High Court on a co-accused, with no grounds to deviate from this consistent approach. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

SUMMARY: The application filed by accused No. 1 and 3 to relax bail conditions (prohibiting entry into Baramati Taluka and weekly police reporting) imposed on 26/06/2024 has been rejected. The court upheld the strict conditions citing that the accused had initially undertaken not to enter the victim's village until trial completion, and the conditions mirror those imposed by the Bombay High Court on a co-accused, with no grounds to deviate from this consistent approach. 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

Additional District Court, Baramati All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case