State of Maharashtra vs Pandharinath Vidyadhar Aamberkar Advocate - Nene Pradeep Pandharinath — 15/2023
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 302,201,. Status: Evidence Part Heard. Next hearing: 05th May 2026.
Sessions Case
CNR: MHRT010003772023
Next Hearing
05th May 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
113/2023
Filing Date
06-06-2023
Registration No
15/2023
Registration Date
07-06-2023
Court
District and session court , Ratnagiri
Judge
3-District Judge-1 and Addl.Session Judge Ratnagiri
FIR Details
FIR Number
19
Police Station
Rajapur Police Station Rajapur.
Year
2023
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State of Maharashtra
Adv. Phansekar Aniruddha Avinash
Respondent(s)
Pandharinath Vidyadhar Aamberkar Advocate - Nene Pradeep Pandharinath
Hearing History
Judge: 3-District Judge-1 and Addl.Session Judge Ratnagiri
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 28-04-2026 | Evidence Part Heard | |
| 21-04-2026 | Evidence Part Heard | |
| 15-04-2026 | Evidence Part Heard | |
| 07-04-2026 | Evidence Part Heard | |
| 31-03-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
Interim Orders
Summary: The Additional Sessions Judge, Ratnagiri allowed the application filed by Sou. Pratiksha Khadape (sister of the accused) and directed Mahindra and Mahindra Finance Services Limited to hand over custody of a seized Thar vehicle (MH 08-AX-6100) to her. The court found that the Finance Company violated court-imposed conditions by taking possession of the vehicle without the applicant's consent, despite being informed that the vehicle was released to her under court supervision for trial purposes. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: The Additional Sessions Judge, Ratnagiri allowed the application filed by Sou. Pratiksha Khadape (sister of the accused) and directed Mahindra and Mahindra Finance Services Limited to hand over custody of a seized Thar vehicle (MH 08-AX-6100) to her. The court found that the Finance Company violated court-imposed conditions by taking possession of the vehicle without the applicant's consent, despite being informed that the vehicle was released to her under court supervision for trial purposes. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts