Naresh Rama Ahire and 2 vs State of maharashtra — 1060/2025
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section Section482. Disposed: Contested--REJECTED on 18th March 2026.
Cri.Bail Appln. - Bail Application
CNR: MHRG170023512025
e-Filing Number
31-12-2025
Filing Number
1782/2025
Filing Date
31-12-2025
Registration No
1060/2025
Registration Date
31-12-2025
Court
District and Addl. Sessions Judge, Panvel, Dist., Raigad
Judge
3-District Judge-2 and Addl. Sessions Judge, Panvel, Dist. Raigad
Decision Date
18th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--REJECTED
FIR Details
FIR Number
394
Police Station
Kharghar Police Station
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Naresh Rama Ahire and 2
Adv. PISAL PRAVIN PRAKASH
Shweta Narayan Undare
Adv. PISAL PRAVIN PRAKASH
Dhiraj Tukaram Pawar
Adv. PISAL PRAVIN PRAKASH
Respondent(s)
State of maharashtra
Hearing History
Judge: 3-District Judge-2 and Addl. Sessions Judge, Panvel, Dist. Raigad
Disposed
Arguments
Arguments
Arguments
Arguments
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 18-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 13-03-2026 | Arguments | |
| 09-03-2026 | Arguments | |
| 02-03-2026 | Arguments | |
| 23-02-2026 | Arguments |
Final Orders / Judgements
The Additional Sessions Judge at Panvel rejected the pre-arrest bail application of three accused (Naresh Rama Ahire, Sweta Narayan Undare, and Dhiraj Tukaram Pawar) charged with cheating under sections 316(2) and 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The court found prima facie evidence that the applicants fraudulently promised to sanction a Rs. 5 crore loan to the informant, obtaining Rs. 13,25,000 without completing any loan process, and rejected their argument that the dispute was merely civil in nature. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The Additional Sessions Judge at Panvel rejected the pre-arrest bail application of three accused (Naresh Rama Ahire, Sweta Narayan Undare, and Dhiraj Tukaram Pawar) charged with cheating under sections 316(2) and 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The court found prima facie evidence that the applicants fraudulently promised to sanction a Rs. 5 crore loan to the informant, obtaining Rs. 13,25,000 without completing any loan process, and rejected their argument that the dispute was merely civil in nature. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts