vrushali nagesh mastud vs nagesh chandrakant mastud Advocate - Deshpande Satish Manohar — 16/2023
Case under Code of Criminal Procedure Section 125(1). Status: Awaiting Warrant. Next hearing: 05th May 2026.
Cri.M.A. - Criminal Misc. Application
CNR: MHPU170007072023
Next Hearing
05th May 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
491/2023
Filing Date
21-03-2023
Registration No
16/2023
Registration Date
21-03-2023
Court
Civil Court,Indapur
Judge
2-4th Jt. CJJD and JMFC, Indapur
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
vrushali nagesh mastud
Adv. Vyawahare Adikrao Sambhaji
shriansh nagesh mastud
Respondent(s)
nagesh chandrakant mastud Advocate - Deshpande Satish Manohar
Hearing History
Judge: 2-4th Jt. CJJD and JMFC, Indapur
Awaiting Warrant
Awaiting Warrant
Awaiting Warrant
Awaiting Warrant
Awaiting Warrant
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 02-04-2026 | Awaiting Warrant | |
| 17-03-2026 | Awaiting Warrant | |
| 07-03-2026 | Awaiting Warrant | |
| 24-02-2026 | Awaiting Warrant | |
| 30-01-2026 | Awaiting Warrant |
Interim Orders
Summary The petition for interim maintenance under CrPC Section 125(1) is partially allowed. The court ordered the respondent (husband) to pay Rs. 5,000 per month as interim maintenance to the petitioner (wife) and their child from the date of filing the original petition until its final disposal. The court found that despite the respondent's financial capacity (earning approximately Rs. 51,017 monthly plus agricultural income), he failed to provide sufficient evidence of supporting the petitioner and child, making them entitled to maintenance during the pendency of the case. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The petition for interim maintenance under CrPC Section 125(1) is partially allowed. The court ordered the respondent (husband) to pay Rs. 5,000 per month as interim maintenance to the petitioner (wife) and their child from the date of filing the original petition until its final disposal. The court found that despite the respondent's financial capacity (earning approximately Rs. 51,017 monthly plus agricultural income), he failed to provide sufficient evidence of supporting the petitioner and child, making them entitled to maintenance during the pendency of the case. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts