State of Maharashtra vs Gurappa Shankarappa Ilurotti Advocate - Kante Pallavi Surendra — 522/2024
Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 103(1). Status: Hearing. Next hearing: 07th April 2026.
Sessions Case
CNR: MHSN170010182024
Filing Number
1511/2024
Filing Date
01-Oct-2024
Registration No
522/2024
Registration Date
01-Oct-2024
Court
District and Additional Sessions Court, Vita
Judge
2-Adhoc District Judge 1 and Additional Sessions Judge
Last updated 05-Apr-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
279
Police Station
Vita
Year
2024
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.State of Maharashtra
Adv. DGP
Respondent(s)
-
1.Gurappa Shankarappa Ilurotti Advocate - Kante Pallavi Surendra
Case History
-
07-Apr-2026
Next hearingPending
-
27-Mar-2026
Hearing
Adhoc District Judge 1 and Additional Sessions Judge
-
24-Mar-2026
Hearing
Adhoc District Judge 1 and Additional Sessions Judge
-
07-Mar-2026
Hearing
Adhoc District Judge 1 and Additional Sessions Judge
-
21-Feb-2026
Hearing
Adhoc District Judge 1 and Additional Sessions Judge
-
03-Feb-2026
Hearing
Adhoc District Judge 1 and Additional Sessions Judge
-
20-Jan-2026
Hearing
Adhoc District Judge 1 and Additional Sessions Judge
-
05-Jan-2026
Hearing
Adhoc District Judge 1 and Additional Sessions Judge
-
24-Dec-2025
Hearing
Adhoc District Judge 1 and Additional Sessions Judge
-
11-Dec-2025
Hearing
Adhoc District Judge 1 and Additional Sessions Judge
-
28-Nov-2025
Hearing
Adhoc District Judge 1 and Additional Sessions Judge
-
14-Nov-2025
Hearing
Adhoc District Judge 1 and Additional Sessions Judge
-
31-Oct-2025
Hearing
Adhoc District Judge 1 and Additional Sessions Judge
-
17-Oct-2025
Hearing
Adhoc District Judge 1 and Additional Sessions Judge
-
04-Oct-2025
Hearing
Adhoc District Judge 1 and Additional Sessions Judge
-
22-Sep-2025
Hearing
Adhoc District Judge 1 and Additional Sessions Judge
-
08-Sep-2025
Hearing
Adhoc District Judge 1 and Additional Sessions Judge
-
25-Aug-2025
Hearing
Adhoc District Judge 1 and Additional Sessions Judge
-
18-Aug-2025
Order on ExhibitView PDF
SUMMARY: The bail application of Gurappa S. Elurotti, accused of assaulting his wife with a spade resulting in her death (under Section 103(1) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita), was rejected. The court found the prosecution had circumstantial evidence including the accused's presence at the spot, an extra-judicial confession, and the seized weapon, coupled with concerns that he would flee justice and pose danger to his deceased wife's child, warranting continued detention. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
18-Aug-2025
Hearing
Adhoc District Judge 1 and Additional Sessions Judge
-
11-Aug-2025
Hearing
Adhoc District Judge 1 and Additional Sessions Judge
-
28-Jul-2025
Hearing
Adhoc District Judge 1 and Additional Sessions Judge
-
14-Jul-2025
Hearing
Adhoc District Judge 1 and Additional Sessions Judge
-
07-Jul-2025
Hearing
Adhoc District Judge 1 and Additional Sessions Judge
-
30-Jun-2025
Hearing
Adhoc District Judge 1 and Additional Sessions Judge
-
21-Jun-2025
Hearing
Adhoc District Judge 1 and Additional Sessions Judge
-
05-Jun-2025
Hearing
District Judge 1 and Additional Sessions Judge
-
09-May-2025
Hearing
District Judge 1 and Additional Sessions Judge
-
17-Apr-2025
Hearing
District Judge 1 and Additional Sessions Judge
-
03-Apr-2025
Hearing
District Judge 1 and Additional Sessions Judge
-
25-Mar-2025
Charge
District Judge 1 and Additional Sessions Judge
-
20-Jan-2025
Charge
District Judge 1 and Additional Sessions Judge
-
21-Oct-2024
Charge
District Judge 1 and Additional Sessions Judge
-
08-Oct-2024
Order on ExhibitView PDF
-
08-Oct-2024
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
01-Oct-2024
Case filed
Registration No. 522/2024
SUMMARY: The bail application of Gurappa S. Elurotti, accused of assaulting his wife with a spade resulting in her death (under Section 103(1) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita), was rejected. The court found the prosecution had circumstantial evidence including the accused's presence at the spot, an extra-judicial confession, and the seized weapon, coupled with concerns that he would flee justice and pose danger to his deceased wife's child, warranting continued detention. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts