State of Maharashtra vs Sunil Gangadhar Athanikar Advocate - Shedbale Saveeta Parag — 658/2020
Case under Copyright Act Section 51,53,. Status: Awaiting Muddemal. Next hearing: 28th April 2026.
R.C.C. - Regular Criminal Case
CNR: MHSN060029092020
Next Hearing
28th April 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
2424/2020
Filing Date
16-12-2020
Registration No
658/2020
Registration Date
16-12-2020
Court
Civil Court Junior Division,Miraj
Judge
2-JT. CIVIL JUDGE JR. DN. MIRAJ, J.M.F.C. MIRAJ
FIR Details
FIR Number
201
Police Station
M.I.D.C. Kupwad Police Station
Year
2020
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State of Maharashtra
Adv. App
Respondent(s)
Sunil Gangadhar Athanikar Advocate - Shedbale Saveeta Parag
Hearing History
Judge: 2-JT. CIVIL JUDGE JR. DN. MIRAJ, J.M.F.C. MIRAJ
Awaiting Muddemal
Awaiting Muddemal
Awaiting Muddemal
Awaiting Muddemal
Awaiting Muddemal
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 07-03-2026 | Awaiting Muddemal | |
| 30-12-2025 | Awaiting Muddemal | |
| 09-10-2025 | Awaiting Muddemal | |
| 23-07-2025 | Awaiting Muddemal | |
| 06-06-2025 | Awaiting Muddemal |
Interim Orders
OUTCOME SUMMARY: The application is allowed. The court ordered release of seized property (103 boxes of MLT candles and 502 water filter cartridges worth Rs. 48,92,500) to the accused/applicant subject to execution of an indemnity bond for the same amount and preparation of a proper panchnama. The applicant was also directed not to sell the goods using the complainant's brand name or any infringing trademark, not to alienate or dispose of the property until case disposal, and to produce the property when required by court. Additionally, seized machinery was ordered to be unsealed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
OUTCOME SUMMARY: The application is allowed. The court ordered release of seized property (103 boxes of MLT candles and 502 water filter cartridges worth Rs. 48,92,500) to the accused/applicant subject to execution of an indemnity bond for the same amount and preparation of a proper panchnama. The applicant was also directed not to sell the goods using the complainant's brand name or any infringing trademark, not to alienate or dispose of the property until case disposal, and to produce the property when required by court. Additionally, seized machinery was ordered to be unsealed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts