The State of Maharashtra thr. Anuradha Hemant Sahastrabuddhe vs Ajit Chandrakant Dabholkar and — 122/2020
Case under The Protection of Children from Sexual Offence Act, 2012 Section 3,4,5FLMOP,6,7,8,9FLMNO,11,12. Status: Judgment. Next hearing: 27th April 2026.
Spl.Case - Special Case (Sessions)
CNR: MHRG170012072020
Next Hearing
27th April 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
684/2020
Filing Date
28-10-2020
Registration No
122/2020
Registration Date
31-10-2020
Court
District and Addl. Sessions Judge, Panvel, Dist., Raigad
Judge
4-District Judge - 3 and Additional Sessions Judge, Panvel
FIR Details
FIR Number
84
Police Station
Karjat Police StationTal.Karjat
Year
2014
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
The State of Maharashtra thr. Anuradha Hemant Sahastrabuddhe
Adv. Government pleader
Respondent(s)
Ajit Chandrakant Dabholkar and
Lalita Bhagvan Tonde
Hearing History
Judge: 4-District Judge - 3 and Additional Sessions Judge, Panvel
Judgment
Arguments
Arguments
Arguments
Arguments
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 09-04-2026 | Judgment | |
| 08-04-2026 | Arguments | |
| 07-04-2026 | Arguments | |
| 06-04-2026 | Arguments | |
| 04-04-2026 | Arguments |
Interim Orders
Summary: Bail application dismissed. Ajit Dabholkar's bail petition under Section 439 CrPC in Special POCSO Case No. 122/2020 was denied by the Additional Sessions Judge, Panvel on 14 September 2022. The court found no grounds for bail given the serious nature of charges involving sexual exploitation of 29 child victims at an unrecognized boarding school, substantive evidence in the chargesheet, and the need to protect the object of the POCSO Act. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: Bail application dismissed. Ajit Dabholkar's bail petition under Section 439 CrPC in Special POCSO Case No. 122/2020 was denied by the Additional Sessions Judge, Panvel on 14 September 2022. The court found no grounds for bail given the serious nature of charges involving sexual exploitation of 29 child victims at an unrecognized boarding school, substantive evidence in the chargesheet, and the need to protect the object of the POCSO Act. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts