The State of Maharashtra vs Laxman @ Dipak Vitthal Mane and 5 others Advocate - Shaikh Ismail N — 314/2018
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 370(1)(2)(3),370(a)(2),34. Status: Evidence Part Heard. Next hearing: 16th June 2026.
Sessions Case
CNR: MHSO010059272018
Next Hearing
16th June 2026
Filing Number
2246/2018
Filing Date
12-11-2018
Registration No
314/2018
Registration Date
13-11-2018
Court
District and Session Court , Solapur
Judge
1-Principal District and Sessions Judge
FIR Details
FIR Number
412
Police Station
Faujdar Chawadi
Year
2018
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
The State of Maharashtra
Adv. App
Respondent(s)
Laxman @ Dipak Vitthal Mane and 5 others Advocate - Shaikh Ismail N
Dattatray Vitthal Mane
Adv. Shaikh Ismail N
Kumar Vitthal Mane
Adv. Shaikh Ismail N
Rajkumar @ Raju Ambadas Solankar
Adv. Shaikh Ismail N
Ankita Jitendra Kute
Adv. Shaikh Ismail N
Tanaji Basu Bandpatte
Adv. Shaikh Ismail N
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Principal District and Sessions Judge
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 02-06-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
| 11-05-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
| 17-04-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
| 02-04-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
| 13-03-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
Interim Orders
Summary of S.C. No. 314/2018 The applicant sought return of seized articles including lodging register, licenses, mobiles, and cash under CrPC §451. The court partly allowed the application, directing return of the tax receipt and Shop Act License upon execution of a Rs.10,000 indemnity bond. However, the court rejected return of the lodging register, mobile phones, hard disc, and cash, holding them essential evidence in the prostitution case registered under P.I.T.A. Act. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary of S.C. No. 314/2018 The applicant sought return of seized articles including lodging register, licenses, mobiles, and cash under CrPC §451. The court partly allowed the application, directing return of the tax receipt and Shop Act License upon execution of a Rs.10,000 indemnity bond. However, the court rejected return of the lodging register, mobile phones, hard disc, and cash, holding them essential evidence in the prostitution case registered under P.I.T.A. Act. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts