Rushikesh Vijay Rananavare vs State of Maharashtra Through Shirval Police Station Advocate - AGP One — 30/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED / GRANTED AFTER FULL HEARING on 18th March 2026.
Cri.Bail Appln.
CNR: MHST190000962026
e-Filing Number
09-02-2026
Filing Number
58/2026
Filing Date
10-02-2026
Registration No
30/2026
Registration Date
10-02-2026
Court
Additional District Court,Wai
Judge
1-District Judge-1, Wai
Decision Date
18th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ALLOWED / GRANTED AFTER FULL HEARING
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Rushikesh Vijay Rananavare
Adv. Madhuri Gopinath Suryawanshi
Respondent(s)
State of Maharashtra Through Shirval Police Station Advocate - AGP One
Hearing History
Judge: 1-District Judge-1, Wai
Disposed
Order
Order
Order
Order
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 18-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 17-03-2026 | Order |
| 16-03-2026 | Order |
| 13-03-2026 | Order |
| 11-03-2026 | Order |
Final Orders / Judgements
SUMMARY: The Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Wai granted bail to Rushikesh Vijay Rananavare in connection with charges of attempt to commit murder and illegal firearms possession. The court found that while the accused participated in purchasing a pistol used in the attack, he had no direct role in the actual shooting, was not present at the incident scene, and had no prior criminal involvement. The court deemed it improper to keep the accused in custody indefinitely at the pre-trial stage based on his peripheral involvement. Bail was granted on a personal recognizance bond of ₹1,00,000 with standard conditions prohibiting tampering with evidence and contacting prosecution witnesses. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
SUMMARY: The Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Wai granted bail to Rushikesh Vijay Rananavare in connection with charges of attempt to commit murder and illegal firearms possession. The court found that while the accused participated in purchasing a pistol used in the attack, he had no direct role in the actual shooting, was not present at the incident scene, and had no prior criminal involvement. The court deemed it improper to keep the accused in custody indefinitely at the pre-trial stage based on his peripheral involvement. Bail was granted on a personal recognizance bond of ₹1,00,000 with standard conditions prohibiting tampering with evidence and contacting prosecution witnesses. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts