Sanjay Balkrushna Gaikawad vs Laxman Ganpat Pawar and — 59/2018
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 420,34,. Disposed: Uncontested--U/SEC. 258 OF CR.PC on 13th March 2026.
R.C.C. - Regular Criminal Case
CNR: MHRG110006012018
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
441/2018
Filing Date
29-07-2018
Registration No
59/2018
Registration Date
29-07-2018
Court
Civil Judge, J.D. and J.M.F.C., Mangaon
Judge
2-Jt. C. J. J. D. and J. M. F. C. Mangaon
Decision Date
13th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--U/SEC. 258 OF CR.PC
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Sanjay Balkrushna Gaikawad
Adv. Gandhi kedar Jayant
Respondent(s)
Laxman Ganpat Pawar and
Pushpa Chandrakant More
Sakhubai Pandurang @ Pandu Pawar
Santosh Pandurang @ Pandu Pawar
Gurudev Pandurang @ Pandu Pawar
Rahul Rajendra Dhupkar
Sanjay Gunaji Dabade
Hearing History
Judge: 2-Jt. C. J. J. D. and J. M. F. C. Mangaon
Disposed
Dismissal Order
Dismissal Order
Order on Exh
Order on Exh
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 13-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 09-03-2026 | Dismissal Order | |
| 12-01-2026 | Dismissal Order | |
| 29-09-2025 | Order on Exh | |
| 01-08-2025 | Order on Exh |
Final Orders / Judgements
The Judicial Magistrate First Class, Mangaon dismissed Regular Criminal Case No. 59/2018 in default under Section 256 of the Cr.P.C., finding that the complainant had abandoned the case filed in 2018 by failing to take necessary steps despite a prior warning order dated 12.01.2026 and remaining absent during proceedings. The court concluded that no purpose would be served in keeping the complaint pending and therefore ordered its dismissal. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
The Judicial Magistrate First Class, Mangaon dismissed Regular Criminal Case No. 59/2018 in default under Section 256 of the Cr.P.C., finding that the complainant had abandoned the case filed in 2018 by failing to take necessary steps despite a prior warning order dated 12.01.2026 and remaining absent during proceedings. The court concluded that no purpose would be served in keeping the complaint pending and therefore ordered its dismissal. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts