Sahyadri Strach And Industries Pvt Ltd Through Vishwas Kondiba Patil vs Nitin Bhimrao Devkate etc. — 70/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 223,61. Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 08th May 2026.

Evidence Next hearing 08-May-2026 this date has passed

R.C.C. - Regular Criminal Case

CNR: MHSN060002372026

e-Filing Number

16-01-2026

Filing Number

221/2026

Filing Date

19-Jan-2026

Registration No

70/2026

Registration Date

19-Jan-2026

Court

Civil Court Junior Division,Miraj

Judge

2-Jt. CIVIL Judge Jr. Dn. Miraj, J.M.F.C. Miraj

Last updated 05-Apr-2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 223,61
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 318(4),318(2),336(2),336(4),340(2)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Sahyadri Strach And Industries Pvt Ltd Through Vishwas Kondiba Patil

    Adv. Sanadiip Mutaalik

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Nitin Bhimrao Devkate etc.

  2. 2.Haridas Govind Lengere

Case History

  1. 08-May-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 02-Apr-2026

    Order on ExhibitView PDF

    Summary In this Marathi court order (FIR No. 00/2026), the court dismissed the anticipatory bail petition filed by the accused. The court found that prima facie evidence exists against the accused for the alleged offenses and rejected the plea for pre-arrest bail protection. The matter was disposed of accordingly. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 02-Apr-2026

    Evidence

    Jt. CIVIL Judge Jr. Dn. Miraj, J.M.F.C. Miraj

  4. 07-Mar-2026

    Verification

    Jt. CIVIL Judge Jr. Dn. Miraj, J.M.F.C. Miraj

  5. 09-Feb-2026

    Order on ExhibitView PDF

  6. 09-Feb-2026

    Verification

    Jt. CIVIL Judge Jr. Dn. Miraj, J.M.F.C. Miraj

  7. 23-Jan-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  8. 19-Jan-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 70/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary In this Marathi court order (FIR No. 00/2026), the court dismissed the anticipatory bail petition filed by the accused. The court found that prima facie evidence exists against the accused for the alleged offenses and rejected the plea for pre-arrest bail protection. The matter was disposed of accordingly. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case