Pravin Shivaji Adsul vs Maharashtra State — 62/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 482. Disposed: Contested--BAIL GRANTED on 10th March 2026.
Cri.Bail Appln. - Bail Application
CNR: MHST010003822026
e-Filing Number
13-02-2026
Filing Number
128/2026
Filing Date
13-Feb-2026
Registration No
62/2026
Registration Date
13-Feb-2026
Court
District and Sessions Court , Satara
Judge
3-District Judge-2 Satara.
Decision Date
10-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--BAIL GRANTED
Last updated 25-Mar-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Pravin Shivaji Adsul
Adv. Jadhav Ketan V
Respondent(s)
-
1.Maharashtra State
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
10-Mar-2026
Order on ExhibitView PDF
The Additional Sessions Judge, Satara granted anticipatory bail to Pravin Shivaji Adsul in a case involving abetment to suicide under BNS Sections 108 and 3(5), finding no prima facie case against him despite charges related to a police officer's suicide. The court relied on the deceased's suicide note being silent about the applicant's involvement, vague allegations regarding video calls, the applicant's cooperation with investigation, permanent residence, and ability to provide stringent conditions to prevent witness tampering. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
10-Mar-2026
Disposed
District Judge-2 Satara.
-
09-Mar-2026
Reply/Say
District Judge-2 Satara.
-
06-Mar-2026
Reply/Say
District Judge-2 Satara.
-
04-Mar-2026
Reply/Say
District Judge-2 Satara.
-
16-Feb-2026
Order on ExhibitView PDF
-
16-Feb-2026
Reply/Say
District Judge-2 Satara.
-
13-Feb-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
13-Feb-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 62/2026
The Additional Sessions Judge, Satara granted anticipatory bail to Pravin Shivaji Adsul in a case involving abetment to suicide under BNS Sections 108 and 3(5), finding no prima facie case against him despite charges related to a police officer's suicide. The court relied on the deceased's suicide note being silent about the applicant's involvement, vague allegations regarding video calls, the applicant's cooperation with investigation, permanent residence, and ability to provide stringent conditions to prevent witness tampering. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts