Mohan Kawduji Kathane vs State of Maharashtra Thr. Police Station, Ramnagar Advocate - Assistant Public Prosecutor — 83/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED / GRANTED AFTER FULL HEARING on 11th March 2026.
Cri.Bail Appln. - Bail Application
CNR: MHWR010004372026
e-Filing Number
27-02-2026
Filing Number
180/2026
Filing Date
02-Mar-2026
Registration No
83/2026
Registration Date
02-Mar-2026
Court
District and Session Court , Wardha
Judge
4-District Judge-3 And Addl. Sessions Judge Wardha
Decision Date
11-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ALLOWED / GRANTED AFTER FULL HEARING
Last updated 21-May-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
148
Police Station
Police Station Ramnagar
Year
2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Mohan Kawduji Kathane
Adv. KHANDEKAR PRIYANKA BHIMRAO
Respondent(s)
-
1.State of Maharashtra Thr. Police Station, Ramnagar Advocate - Assistant Public Prosecutor
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
11-Mar-2026
Order on ExhibitView PDF
The court allowed the bail application of Mohan s/o Kawduji Kathane, accused of outraging modesty under Section 75 of BNS, 2023 and Section 12 of POCSO Act. The court found that substantial investigation was completed, the accused had no criminal background, and continued custody was unwarranted, though it imposed conditions including weekly police station attendance and a ban on witness intimidation. Bail was granted on furnishing personal recognizance and surety of Rs. 25,000 each. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
11-Mar-2026
Disposed
District Judge-3 And Addl. Sessions Judge Wardha
-
10-Mar-2026
Order
District Judge-3 And Addl. Sessions Judge Wardha
-
07-Mar-2026
Reply/Say
District Judge-3 And Addl. Sessions Judge Wardha
-
04-Mar-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
02-Mar-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 83/2026
The court allowed the bail application of Mohan s/o Kawduji Kathane, accused of outraging modesty under Section 75 of BNS, 2023 and Section 12 of POCSO Act. The court found that substantial investigation was completed, the accused had no criminal background, and continued custody was unwarranted, though it imposed conditions including weekly police station attendance and a ban on witness intimidation. Bail was granted on furnishing personal recognizance and surety of Rs. 25,000 each. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts