Ganpat Pandurang Mukne vs The State of Maharashtra Through Ghodegaon Police Station — 103/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 482. Disposed: Contested--BAIL GRANTED on 20th March 2026.
Cri.Bail Appln. - Bail Application
CNR: MHPU210002542026
e-Filing Number
06-03-2026
Filing Number
175/2026
Filing Date
07-03-2026
Registration No
103/2026
Registration Date
07-03-2026
Court
Additional District Court, Khed
Judge
1-DISTRICT JUDGE - 1 AND ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE, KHED - RAJGURUNAGAR
Decision Date
20th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--BAIL GRANTED
FIR Details
FIR Number
216
Police Station
GHODEGAON POLICE STATION
Year
2021
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Ganpat Pandurang Mukne
Adv. KALE VAIBHAV RAJENDRA
Respondent(s)
The State of Maharashtra Through Ghodegaon Police Station
Hearing History
Judge: 1-DISTRICT JUDGE - 1 AND ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE, KHED - RAJGURUNAGAR
Disposed
Reply/Say
Reply/Say
Reply/Say
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 20-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 17-03-2026 | Reply/Say | |
| 10-03-2026 | Reply/Say | |
| 07-03-2026 | Reply/Say |
Final Orders / Judgements
The court granted anticipatory bail to Ganpat Pandurang Mukane, accused of illegal liquor manufacturing and distribution, on a personal recognizance bond of Rs. 25,000 with surety in the like amount. The court found that since the incident occurred in 2021, investigation was completed with chargesheet filed, no custodial interrogation was necessary, and the 60-year-old applicant had no criminal antecedents, warranting bail subject to standard conditions including court attendance and non-interference with witnesses. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The court granted anticipatory bail to Ganpat Pandurang Mukane, accused of illegal liquor manufacturing and distribution, on a personal recognizance bond of Rs. 25,000 with surety in the like amount. The court found that since the incident occurred in 2021, investigation was completed with chargesheet filed, no custodial interrogation was necessary, and the 60-year-old applicant had no criminal antecedents, warranting bail subject to standard conditions including court attendance and non-interference with witnesses. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts