State of Maharashtra through P.S.O. Shirpur vs Sonaba Prabhakarrao Deshmukh Advocate - Adv. Bonde — 16/2024

Case under Arms Act Section 4,25. Status: Arguments. Next hearing: 29th June 2026.

R.C.C. - Regular Criminal Case

CNR: MHWS080001702024

Arguments

Next Hearing

29th June 2026

Filing Number

141/2024

Filing Date

23-01-2024

Registration No

16/2024

Registration Date

23-01-2024

Court

Civil Court Junior Division,Risod

Judge

1-Civil Judge J.D.J.M.F.C.Risod.

FIR Details

FIR Number

6

Police Station

P. S. Shirpur

Year

2024

Acts & Sections

Arms Act Section 4,25

Petitioner(s)

State of Maharashtra through P.S.O. Shirpur

Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

Sonaba Prabhakarrao Deshmukh Advocate - Adv. Bonde

Hearing History

Judge: 1-Civil Judge J.D.J.M.F.C.Risod.

18-05-2026

Arguments

11-05-2026

Statement U/sec.313 Cr.P.C.

20-04-2026

Statement U/sec.313 Cr.P.C.

16-03-2026

Evidence

09-02-2026

Evidence

Interim Orders

08-04-2024
Order on Exhibit

Case Summary: Cri. M.A. No. 16/2024 (Sonbarao v/s State) The applicant sought interim custody of a seized Hero Passion Pro motorcycle allegedly used in committing offences under Sections 4 and 25 of the Arms Act, 1959. The Judicial Magistrate rejected the application, holding that the vehicle constitutes evidence directly connected to the serious crime and that releasing it risked its sale or concealment. The court noted a dangerous weapon (Gupti) was recovered from the accused during the vehicle's search, no valid license was provided, and a chargesheet had already been filed showing prima facie substance against the accused. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: Cri. M.A. No. 16/2024 (Sonbarao v/s State) The applicant sought interim custody of a seized Hero Passion Pro motorcycle allegedly used in committing offences under Sections 4 and 25 of the Arms Act, 1959. The Judicial Magistrate rejected the application, holding that the vehicle constitutes evidence directly connected to the serious crime and that releasing it risked its sale or concealment. The court noted a dangerous weapon (Gupti) was recovered from the accused during the vehicle's search, no valid license was provided, and a chargesheet had already been filed showing prima facie substance against the accused. 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

Civil Court Junior Division,Risod All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case