Shubham kailas bhalerao vs State of Maharashtra through PSO Ansing — 83/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 482. Disposed: Contested--BAIL REFUSED on 16th March 2026.

Cri.Bail Appln. - Bail Application

CNR: MHWS010002902026

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

07-03-2026

Filing Number

164/2026

Filing Date

07-03-2026

Registration No

83/2026

Registration Date

09-03-2026

Court

District and Sessions Court, Washim

Judge

6-District Judge-1 and ASJ, Washim

Decision Date

16th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--BAIL REFUSED

FIR Details

FIR Number

76

Police Station

ANSING

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 482

Petitioner(s)

Shubham kailas bhalerao

Adv. Adv. Piyush Diliprao Ingle

Respondent(s)

State of Maharashtra through PSO Ansing

Hearing History

Judge: 6-District Judge-1 and ASJ, Washim

16-03-2026

Disposed

13-03-2026

Order

12-03-2026

Hearing

09-03-2026

Awaiting Notice

Final Orders / Judgements

16-03-2026
Order on Exhibit

Case Summary: Cri.B.A.No.83/2026 Court Decision: The Additional Sessions Judge, Washim rejected Shubham Kailas Bhalerao's anticipatory bail application on March 16, 2026. Key Reasoning: The court found that the FIR disclosed specific criminal conduct by the accused (armed robbery of ₹80,000 with weapon still unsiezed), there was a prior extortion case pending against him, and critically, he had allegedly threatened the informant via Instagram to withdraw the FIR after its registration—constituting witness intimidation. These factors collectively rendered him unsuitable for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the BNSS Act, 2023. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: Cri.B.A.No.83/2026 Court Decision: The Additional Sessions Judge, Washim rejected Shubham Kailas Bhalerao's anticipatory bail application on March 16, 2026. Key Reasoning: The court found that the FIR disclosed specific criminal conduct by the accused (armed robbery of ₹80,000 with weapon still unsiezed), there was a prior extortion case pending against him, and critically, he had allegedly threatened the informant via Instagram to withdraw the FIR after its registration—constituting witness intimidation. These factors collectively rendered him unsuitable for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the BNSS Act, 2023. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

District and Sessions Court, Washim All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case