State of Maharashtra Through Deorukh Police Station vs Pratamesh Ramesh Sogam etc 3 Advocate - Shinde Rajesh Kashiram — 85/2023
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 379,411,34. Status: Evidence Part Heard. Next hearing: 26th May 2026.
R.C.C. - Regular Criminal Case
CNR: MHRT080006712023
Next Hearing
26th May 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
557/2023
Filing Date
02-11-2023
Registration No
85/2023
Registration Date
02-11-2023
Court
Civil Judge Junior Division , Deorukh
Judge
1-Civil Judge J.D. J.M.F.C. Deorukh
FIR Details
FIR Number
132
Police Station
Deorukh Police Station
Year
2023
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State of Maharashtra Through Deorukh Police Station
Adv. Assistant Public Prosecutor
Respondent(s)
Pratamesh Ramesh Sogam etc 3 Advocate - Shinde Rajesh Kashiram
Neha @ Rashmi Satywan Pawar
Adv. Suhel Salim Shaikh
Majibulla Ashruf Khan
Adv. Murudkar Bhakti Sagar
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Civil Judge J.D. J.M.F.C. Deorukh
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 16-04-2026 | Evidence Part Heard | |
| 10-03-2026 | Evidence Part Heard | |
| 23-12-2025 | Evidence Part Heard | |
| 11-11-2025 | Evidence Part Heard | |
| 04-11-2025 | Evidence Part Heard |
Interim Orders
Case Summary Case: N.Fo.K. No. 85/2023 (Deorukh Court, Maharashtra) Outcome: The cross-examination of accused #1 and #2 was completed and bail/acquittal for accused #1 and #2 is upheld (उलटतपास पूर्ण). For accused #3, the defense counsel B.S. Murudkar adopted the same cross-examination arguments as for accused #1 and #2, with the objection being overruled. The case proceeded with examination of witnesses in a theft case involving temple bell theft. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary Case: N.Fo.K. No. 85/2023 (Deorukh Court, Maharashtra) Outcome: The cross-examination of accused #1 and #2 was completed and bail/acquittal for accused #1 and #2 is upheld (उलटतपास पूर्ण). For accused #3, the defense counsel B.S. Murudkar adopted the same cross-examination arguments as for accused #1 and #2, with the objection being overruled. The case proceeded with examination of witnesses in a theft case involving temple bell theft. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts