Manoj Banduji Nimbulkar vs State of Maharashtra Thr Police Station, Arvi Advocate - Assistant Public Prosecutor — 62/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 482. Disposed: Contested--REJECTED on 12th March 2026.
Cri.Bail Appln. - Bail Application
CNR: MHWR010003142026
e-Filing Number
10-02-2026
Filing Number
137/2026
Filing Date
10-02-2026
Registration No
62/2026
Registration Date
10-02-2026
Court
District and Session Court , Wardha
Judge
2-DISTRICT JUDGE-1 AND ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE, WARDHA
Decision Date
12th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--REJECTED
FIR Details
FIR Number
3
Police Station
Police Station Arvi
Year
2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Manoj Banduji Nimbulkar
Adv. Sheikh Y. I.
Respondent(s)
State of Maharashtra Thr Police Station, Arvi Advocate - Assistant Public Prosecutor
Hearing History
Judge: 2-DISTRICT JUDGE-1 AND ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE, WARDHA
Disposed
Order
Order
Hearing
Hearing
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 12-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 11-03-2026 | Order |
| 07-03-2026 | Order |
| 06-03-2026 | Hearing |
| 04-03-2026 | Hearing |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary: The Additional Sessions Judge, Wardha, rejected the anticipatory bail application of Manoj Banduji Nimbulkar, who was accused of misappropriating ₹10,85,929/- collected as loan pre-closure payments from 52 members of Bharat Financial Inclusion Ltd. The court found prima facie evidence supporting the allegations and determined that custodial interrogation was necessary to trace the misappropriated funds and identify any associates involved in the crime. The court held that in serious economic offences involving breach of trust and institutional fund misappropriation, discretion to grant anticipatory bail must be exercised cautiously. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: The Additional Sessions Judge, Wardha, rejected the anticipatory bail application of Manoj Banduji Nimbulkar, who was accused of misappropriating ₹10,85,929/- collected as loan pre-closure payments from 52 members of Bharat Financial Inclusion Ltd. The court found prima facie evidence supporting the allegations and determined that custodial interrogation was necessary to trace the misappropriated funds and identify any associates involved in the crime. The court held that in serious economic offences involving breach of trust and institutional fund misappropriation, discretion to grant anticipatory bail must be exercised cautiously. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts