State through P.S.O.P.S. Washim City vs Sharad Madhukar Chavhan Advocate - UNDAL SHAMRAO KUNDLIKRAO — 20/2019
Case under Prevention of Corruption Act Section 7,13,(1)(D),13(2). Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 19th June 2026.
Spl.Case ACB - Special Case under Prevention of Corruption Act
CNR: MHWS010006942019
Next Hearing
19th June 2026
Filing Number
279/2019
Filing Date
18-04-2019
Registration No
20/2019
Registration Date
18-04-2019
Court
District and Sessions Court, Washim
Judge
1-Principal District and Sessions Judge, Washim
FIR Details
FIR Number
153
Police Station
ACB office, Washim
Year
2017
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State through P.S.O.P.S. Washim City
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
Sharad Madhukar Chavhan Advocate - UNDAL SHAMRAO KUNDLIKRAO
Vaibhav Ravindra Rathod
Adv. उंडाळ शामराव कुंडलीकराव
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Principal District and Sessions Judge, Washim
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 06-06-2026 | Evidence |
| 26-05-2026 | Evidence |
| 07-05-2026 | Evidence |
| 24-04-2026 | Evidence |
| 09-04-2026 | Evidence |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: Spl.A.C.B. Case No. 20/2019 Outcome: The court rejected Accused No. 2's (Vaibhav Ravindra Rathod) application seeking discharge from corruption charges. The court found prima-facie evidence that Rathod, working as an office assistant on contract basis, demanded a bribe of Rs. 30,000 and therefore qualifies as a "public servant" under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, making Section 7 charges applicable against him despite his contractual employment status. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: Spl.A.C.B. Case No. 20/2019 Outcome: The court rejected Accused No. 2's (Vaibhav Ravindra Rathod) application seeking discharge from corruption charges. The court found prima-facie evidence that Rathod, working as an office assistant on contract basis, demanded a bribe of Rs. 30,000 and therefore qualifies as a "public servant" under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, making Section 7 charges applicable against him despite his contractual employment status. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts