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.

Cri.M.A. - Criminal Misc. Application

CNR: MHRG090002632024

Awaiting Warrant

Next Hearing

05th May 2026

e-Filing Number

18-04-2024

Filing Number

216/2024

Filing Date

19-04-2024

Registration No

34/2024

Registration Date

20-04-2024

Court

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

Judge

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

Acts & Sections

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

Petitioner(s)

Vedika Sandip Shinde

Adv. MORE DEVYANI JANARDAN

Ayansh Sandip Shinde

Adv. MORE DEVYANI JANARDAN

Respondent(s)

Sandip Vaman Shinde

Vaman Sitaram Shinde

Samidha Ravindra Kadam

Hearing History

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

07-04-2026

Awaiting Warrant

09-03-2026

Awaiting Warrant

02-02-2026

Awaiting Warrant

05-01-2026

Awaiting Warrant

13-12-2025

Lok-Nyayalaya

Interim Orders

06-03-2025
Order on Exhibit

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.

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.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

Civil Judge, J.D. and J.M.F.C., Roha All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case