The State Of Maharashtra Through Mangaon Police Station Cr. No. 98/2025 vs Kalpesh Baban Jadhav — 60/2025
Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 103(1),311,333,. Status: Notice Ready. Next hearing: 05th May 2026.
Sessions Case
CNR: MHRG150008052025
Next Hearing
05th May 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
367/2025
Filing Date
15-11-2025
Registration No
60/2025
Registration Date
15-11-2025
Court
District Judge-1 and Additional Sessions Judge, Mangaon
Judge
1-District Judge 2 and Addl Session Judge Mangaon
FIR Details
FIR Number
98
Police Station
Mangaon Police Stn.
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
The State Of Maharashtra Through Mangaon Police Station Cr. No. 98/2025
Respondent(s)
Kalpesh Baban Jadhav
Hearing History
Judge: 1-District Judge 2 and Addl Session Judge Mangaon
Notice Ready
Notice Ready
Charge
Argument on Exh.____Ready
Argument on Exh.____Ready
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 21-04-2026 | Notice Ready | |
| 07-04-2026 | Notice Ready | |
| 24-03-2026 | Charge | |
| 10-03-2026 | Argument on Exh.____Ready | |
| 24-02-2026 | Argument on Exh.____Ready |
Interim Orders
Summary: The bail application filed by accused Kalpesh Baban Jadhav under Section 483 BNSS, 2023 for charges of murder, robbery, and related offences under BNS, 2023 has been rejected. The court found prima facie evidence of involvement including recovery of mobile and gold ornaments matching the FIR description, jeweler and mobile repair shop owner statements identifying the accused, and concluded that tampering of prosecution witnesses cannot be ruled out given all parties reside in the same village. The gravity of the offence (punishable with life imprisonment or death) warranted denial of bail at this stage. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: The bail application filed by accused Kalpesh Baban Jadhav under Section 483 BNSS, 2023 for charges of murder, robbery, and related offences under BNS, 2023 has been rejected. The court found prima facie evidence of involvement including recovery of mobile and gold ornaments matching the FIR description, jeweler and mobile repair shop owner statements identifying the accused, and concluded that tampering of prosecution witnesses cannot be ruled out given all parties reside in the same village. The gravity of the offence (punishable with life imprisonment or death) warranted denial of bail at this stage. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts