Vakil Bali Mohammad vs The State of Maharashtra — 174/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483. Disposed: Contested--BAIL REFUSED on 09th March 2026.
Cri.Bail Appln. - Bail Application
CNR: MHRG170003682026
e-Filing Number
28-02-2026
Filing Number
280/2026
Filing Date
28-02-2026
Registration No
174/2026
Registration Date
28-02-2026
Court
District and Addl. Sessions Judge, Panvel, Dist., Raigad
Judge
6-District Judge 4 and Addl.Session Judge, Panvel-Raigad
Decision Date
09th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--BAIL REFUSED
FIR Details
FIR Number
1
Police Station
Matheran Police StationTal.Karjat
Year
2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Vakil Bali Mohammad
Adv. Ankit Bangera
Respondent(s)
The State of Maharashtra
Hearing History
Judge: 6-District Judge 4 and Addl.Session Judge, Panvel-Raigad
Disposed
Order on Exh
Order on Exh
Order on Exh
Order on Exh
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 09-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 07-03-2026 | Order on Exh | |
| 06-03-2026 | Order on Exh | |
| 05-03-2026 | Order on Exh | |
| 04-03-2026 | Order on Exh |
Final Orders / Judgements
The Additional Sessions Judge at Panvel rejected the bail application of Vakil Bali Mohammad, who was arrested for alleged armed robbery involving knife threats, theft of ₹70,000 cash and gold ornaments, and assault on a shopkeeper and his wife on 16/01/2026. The court found the offense serious, noted that a co-accused remains absconding, stolen cash remains unrecovered, and further investigation and custody was necessary, thereby denying bail. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The Additional Sessions Judge at Panvel rejected the bail application of Vakil Bali Mohammad, who was arrested for alleged armed robbery involving knife threats, theft of ₹70,000 cash and gold ornaments, and assault on a shopkeeper and his wife on 16/01/2026. The court found the offense serious, noted that a co-accused remains absconding, stolen cash remains unrecovered, and further investigation and custody was necessary, thereby denying bail. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts