Kailas Manikrao Bramhane vs State of Maharashtra Ranjangaon Police Station — 16/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 503. Disposed: Uncontested--ALLOWED OTHERWISE on 09th March 2026.
Cri.M.A. - Criminal Misc. Application
CNR: MHPU200002492026
e-Filing Number
12-01-2026
Filing Number
231/2026
Filing Date
12-01-2026
Registration No
16/2026
Registration Date
13-01-2026
Court
Civil Court,Shirur
Judge
5-3rd Joint C. J. J. D and J. M. F. C. Ghodnadi
Decision Date
09th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--ALLOWED OTHERWISE
FIR Details
FIR Number
466
Police Station
Ranjangaon Police Station
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Kailas Manikrao Bramhane
Adv. Nikhil madhukar manjare
Respondent(s)
State of Maharashtra Ranjangaon Police Station
Hearing History
Judge: 5-3rd Joint C. J. J. D and J. M. F. C. Ghodnadi
Disposed
Order
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Argument on Exh.____Unready
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 09-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 07-03-2026 | Order | |
| 27-02-2026 | Argument on Exh.____Unready | |
| 21-02-2026 | Argument on Exh.____Unready | |
| 16-02-2026 | Argument on Exh.____Unready |
Final Orders / Judgements
The court granted the petitioner's application for release of a seized motor vehicle (MH-16-AN-8172) valued at ₹1,00,000 in connection with FIR No. 466/2025 registered at Rajanagaon Police Station, Pune, on the condition that the petitioner deposit the amount with the court and comply with specified terms and conditions. The court held that the seized vehicle belongs to the petitioner and there is no evidence suggesting it was used in criminal activity, therefore its return is justified pending final case disposal. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
The court granted the petitioner's application for release of a seized motor vehicle (MH-16-AN-8172) valued at ₹1,00,000 in connection with FIR No. 466/2025 registered at Rajanagaon Police Station, Pune, on the condition that the petitioner deposit the amount with the court and comply with specified terms and conditions. The court held that the seized vehicle belongs to the petitioner and there is no evidence suggesting it was used in criminal activity, therefore its return is justified pending final case disposal. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts