State of Maharashtra vs Savita Suresh Joshi etc. 3 Advocate - Tharwal Sachin Sudhir — 4/2021

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 354,34,. Status: Documents. Next hearing: 14th May 2026.

Spl.Case - Special Case (Sessions)

CNR: MHRT010001392021

Documents

Next Hearing

14th May 2026

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

35/2021

Filing Date

11-02-2021

Registration No

4/2021

Registration Date

12-02-2021

Court

District and session court , Ratnagiri

Judge

3-District Judge-1 and Addl.Session Judge Ratnagiri

FIR Details

FIR Number

41

Police Station

Jaigad Police Station.

Year

2020

Acts & Sections

INDIAN PENAL CODE Section 354,34,
The Protection of Children from Sexual Offence Act, 2012 Section 4,8,12,

Petitioner(s)

State of Maharashtra

Adv. Prabhu Varsha Dattatray

Respondent(s)

Savita Suresh Joshi etc. 3 Advocate - Tharwal Sachin Sudhir

Sunil Suresh Joshi

Adv. Tharwal Sachin Sudhir

Suresh Krushnaji Joshi

Adv. Tharwal Sachin Sudhir

Hearing History

Judge: 3-District Judge-1 and Addl.Session Judge Ratnagiri

12-03-2026

Documents

10-03-2026

Argument on Exh.____Unready

09-03-2026

Argument on Exh.____Unready

05-03-2026

Argument on Exh.____Unready

02-03-2026

Awaiting R and P

Interim Orders

10-03-2026
Order on Exhibit

Summary: The application by accused Sunil Suresh Joshi seeking permission to obtain a passport and travel abroad during pendency of a POCSO case was partly allowed. The court permitted him to apply for a passport but imposed a condition requiring prior court permission before traveling abroad with a detailed schedule. The court clarified that its no-objection does not direct passport authorities to issue the passport, which shall be decided on merits. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The application by accused Sunil Suresh Joshi seeking permission to obtain a passport and travel abroad during pendency of a POCSO case was partly allowed. The court permitted him to apply for a passport but imposed a condition requiring prior court permission before traveling abroad with a detailed schedule. The court clarified that its no-objection does not direct passport authorities to issue the passport, which shall be decided on merits. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

District and session court , Ratnagiri All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case