State of Maharashtra Taloja Police Station vs Bharat Sadashiv Jadhav — 131/2025
Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 64,65(2),351(2). Status: Production of Accused. Next hearing: 05th May 2026.
Spl.Case - Special Case (Sessions)
CNR: MHRG170010332025
Next Hearing
05th May 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
761/2025
Filing Date
29-05-2025
Registration No
131/2025
Registration Date
29-05-2025
Court
District and Addl. Sessions Judge, Panvel, Dist., Raigad
Judge
4-District Judge - 3 and Additional Sessions Judge, Panvel
FIR Details
FIR Number
115
Police Station
Taloja Police Station Tal.Panvel
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State of Maharashtra Taloja Police Station
Adv. Government pleader
Respondent(s)
Bharat Sadashiv Jadhav
Hearing History
Judge: 4-District Judge - 3 and Additional Sessions Judge, Panvel
Production of Accused
Production of Accused
Production of Accused
Production of Accused
Production of Accused
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 21-04-2026 | Production of Accused | |
| 07-04-2026 | Production of Accused | |
| 24-03-2026 | Production of Accused | |
| 10-03-2026 | Production of Accused | |
| 24-02-2026 | Production of Accused |
Interim Orders
Case Summary Bail Application Rejected The Special Judge at Panvel rejected the bail application of Bharat Sadashiv Jadhav, accused of committing penetrative sexual assault on a 12-year-old victim (his niece) through threats on multiple occasions between June 2024 and March 2025. The court found the offense heinous given the accused's position of trust as a close relative and the victim's age, determining there was substantial risk of witness tampering and evidence obstruction, making continued custody necessary. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary Bail Application Rejected The Special Judge at Panvel rejected the bail application of Bharat Sadashiv Jadhav, accused of committing penetrative sexual assault on a 12-year-old victim (his niece) through threats on multiple occasions between June 2024 and March 2025. The court found the offense heinous given the accused's position of trust as a close relative and the victim's age, determining there was substantial risk of witness tampering and evidence obstruction, making continued custody necessary. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts