Vedika Sandip Shinde vs Sandip Vaman Shinde — 34/2024

Case under Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act Section 12, 17, 18, 19, 20, 22, 23. Status: Awaiting Warrant. Next hearing: 05th May 2026.

Awaiting Warrant Next hearing 05-May-2026 this date has passed

Cri.M.A. - Criminal Misc. Application

CNR: MHRG090002632024

e-Filing Number

18-04-2024

Filing Number

216/2024

Filing Date

19-Apr-2024

Registration No

34/2024

Registration Date

20-Apr-2024

Court

Civil Judge, J.D. and J.M.F.C., Roha

Judge

1-C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C Roha

Last updated 13-Apr-2026

Acts & Sections

Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act Section 12, 17, 18, 19, 20, 22, 23

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Vedika Sandip Shinde

    Adv. MORE DEVYANI JANARDAN

  2. 2.Ayansh Sandip Shinde

    Adv. MORE DEVYANI JANARDAN

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Sandip Vaman Shinde

  2. 2.Vaman Sitaram Shinde

  3. 3.Samidha Ravindra Kadam

Case History

  1. 05-May-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 07-Apr-2026

    Awaiting Warrant

    C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C Roha

  3. 09-Mar-2026

    Awaiting Warrant

    C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C Roha

  4. 02-Feb-2026

    Awaiting Warrant

    C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C Roha

  5. 05-Jan-2026

    Awaiting Warrant

    C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C Roha

  6. 13-Dec-2025

    Lok-Nyayalaya

    C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C Roha

  7. 29-Nov-2025

    Lok-Nyayalaya

    C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C Roha

  8. 12-Nov-2025

    Awaiting Warrant

    C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C Roha

  9. 15-Oct-2025

    Awaiting Warrant

    C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C Roha

  10. 29-Sep-2025

    Awaiting Warrant

    C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C Roha

  11. 18-Jul-2025

    Awaiting Warrant

    C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C Roha

  12. 21-Jun-2025

    Awaiting Warrant

    C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C Roha

  13. 16-Apr-2025

    Evidence

    Jt.C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C. Roha

  14. 27-Mar-2025

    Evidence

    Jt.C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C. Roha

  15. 06-Mar-2025

    Order on ExhibitView PDF

    SUMMARY: The petition filed by Vedika Shinde under Section 23 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, was partially allowed. The court granted interim maintenance of Rs. 2,000 per month to the petitioner (Vedika Shinde) and Rs. 1,000 per month each for her two children (Ayansh Sandeep Shinde) from the respondent (Sandeep Shinde) until the final decision in the main case. The court found that the respondent has the primary responsibility to maintain his wife and children, and the petitioner demonstrated financial dependency despite her employment as a professor. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  16. 06-Mar-2025

    Evidence

    Jt.C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C. Roha

  17. 03-Mar-2025

    Order on Exh

    Jt.C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C. Roha

  18. 12-Feb-2025

    Order on Exh

    Jt.C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C. Roha

  19. 01-Feb-2025

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Jt.C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C. Roha

  20. 11-Dec-2024

    Evidence

    Jt.C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C. Roha

  21. 25-Nov-2024

    Evidence

    Jt.C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C. Roha

  22. 07-Nov-2024

    Reply/Say

    Jt.C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C. Roha

  23. 28-Sep-2024

    Reply/Say

    Jt.C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C. Roha

  24. 03-Sep-2024

    Reply/Say

    Jt.C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C. Roha

  25. 03-Aug-2024

    Reply/Say

    Jt.C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C. Roha

  26. 10-Jul-2024

    Awaiting Notice

    Jt.C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C. Roha

  27. 03-Jun-2024

    First Order

    Jt.C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C. Roha

  28. 17-May-2024

    First Order

    Jt.C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C. Roha

  29. 20-Apr-2024

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  30. 19-Apr-2024

    Case filed

    Registration No. 34/2024

casestatus.in Summary

SUMMARY: The petition filed by Vedika Shinde under Section 23 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, was partially allowed. The court granted interim maintenance of Rs. 2,000 per month to the petitioner (Vedika Shinde) and Rs. 1,000 per month each for her two children (Ayansh Sandeep Shinde) from the respondent (Sandeep Shinde) until the final decision in the main case. The court found that the respondent has the primary responsibility to maintain his wife and children, and the petitioner demonstrated financial dependency despite her employment as a professor. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case