State of Maharashtra Through Bhuinj Police Station vs Vijay Nivrutti Jadhav — 48/2025
Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 336, 324, 504, 506. Status: Evidence Part Heard. Next hearing: 01st April 2026.
R.C.C. - Regular Criminal Case
CNR: MHST160003502025
Next Hearing
01st April 2026
Filing Number
251/2025
Filing Date
09-04-2025
Registration No
48/2025
Registration Date
09-04-2025
Court
Civil Court Junior Division , Wai
Judge
2-IInd Jt. Civil Judge Jr. Dn. J.M.F.C Wai
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State of Maharashtra Through Bhuinj Police Station
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
Vijay Nivrutti Jadhav
Shankar Sopan Jadhav
Omkar Vijay Jadhav
Hearing History
Judge: 2-IInd Jt. Civil Judge Jr. Dn. J.M.F.C Wai
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 20-03-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
| 06-03-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
| 06-02-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
| 12-01-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
| 01-12-2025 | Evidence |
Interim Orders
Summary The court examined the cross-examination of witness #1 in case No. 48/2025 and found that the witness admitted to providing false testimony regarding an alleged incident on 18.06.2024. The witness confessed that the statements made to police, including claims about an assault by the accused Vijay and related circumstances, were entirely fabricated. The court's order notes that the cross-examination revealed inconsistencies and the witness's own admission of perjury, concluding that no credible incident actually occurred as alleged in the complaint. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The court examined the cross-examination of witness #1 in case No. 48/2025 and found that the witness admitted to providing false testimony regarding an alleged incident on 18.06.2024. The witness confessed that the statements made to police, including claims about an assault by the accused Vijay and related circumstances, were entirely fabricated. The court's order notes that the cross-examination revealed inconsistencies and the witness's own admission of perjury, concluding that no credible incident actually occurred as alleged in the complaint. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts