State of Maharashtra vs Roshan Arun Koli and 4 Advocate - Parkar M. M. — 7/2023

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 304,308,312,313,314,323,498(A),34,201. Status: Hearing. Next hearing: 12th May 2026.

Sessions Case

CNR: MHRG010001182023

Hearing

Next Hearing

12th May 2026

e-Filing Number

20-10-2022

Filing Number

32/2023

Filing Date

21-01-2023

Registration No

7/2023

Registration Date

21-01-2023

Court

District and Session Court Raigad

Judge

17-DISTRICT JUDGE-1 ADDL.SESSIONS JUDGE

FIR Details

FIR Number

57

Police Station

Dadar Coastal Police Station

Year

2022

Acts & Sections

INDIAN PENAL CODE Section 304,308,312,313,314,323,498(A),34,201
Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act 1971 Section 3,4

Petitioner(s)

State of Maharashtra

Respondent(s)

Roshan Arun Koli and 4 Advocate - Parkar M. M.

Subhadra Arun Koli

Dr. Shekhar Ramdas Dhumal

Devata Vinayak Bhoir

Vinayak Govardhan Bhoir

Hearing History

Judge: 17-DISTRICT JUDGE-1 ADDL.SESSIONS JUDGE

06-04-2026

Hearing

17-03-2026

Hearing

09-03-2026

Hearing

16-02-2026

Hearing

28-01-2026

Hearing

Interim Orders

03-10-2023
Order on Exhibit

Case Summary Bail Application Rejected – Accused No. 1 Roshan Arun Koli's third bail application was dismissed on October 3, 2023. The Sessions Judge held that he is the primary accused in a POCSO case involving illegal abortion leading to death and is not entitled to bail on parity grounds, despite another co-accused being released. The court found his role fundamentally different and noted the trial had already commenced, with no changed circumstances warranting bail. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary Bail Application Rejected – Accused No. 1 Roshan Arun Koli's third bail application was dismissed on October 3, 2023. The Sessions Judge held that he is the primary accused in a POCSO case involving illegal abortion leading to death and is not entitled to bail on parity grounds, despite another co-accused being released. The court found his role fundamentally different and noted the trial had already commenced, with no changed circumstances warranting bail. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

District and Session Court Raigad All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case