Maroti Fakira Thakare vs State Through Police Station Officer Risod — 32/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 497,503. Disposed: Uncontested--ALLOWED / GRANTED AFTER FULL HEARING on 16th March 2026.
Cri.M.A. - Criminal Misc. Application
CNR: MHWS080003982026
e-Filing Number
20-02-2026
Filing Number
312/2026
Filing Date
26-02-2026
Registration No
32/2026
Registration Date
26-02-2026
Court
Civil Court Junior Division,Risod
Judge
2-Jt.Civil Judge Jr.Dn. J.M.F.C.Risod.
Decision Date
16th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--ALLOWED / GRANTED AFTER FULL HEARING
FIR Details
Police Station
P.S. Risod
Year
0
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Maroti Fakira Thakare
Adv. TAVSHIFUDDIN KAISARUDDIN
Respondent(s)
State Through Police Station Officer Risod
Hearing History
Judge: 2-Jt.Civil Judge Jr.Dn. J.M.F.C.Risod.
Disposed
Hearing
Reply/Say
Reply/Say
Reply/Say
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 16-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 10-03-2026 | Hearing |
| 09-03-2026 | Reply/Say |
| 07-03-2026 | Reply/Say |
| 02-03-2026 | Reply/Say |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary: Cri.M.A. No. 32/2026 (Maroti Fakira Thakare v. State) The court allowed Maroti Thakare's application for release of his seized Mahindra Bolero vehicle, finding him the rightful owner based on registration and identity documents. The court rejected the police's objections regarding evidence preservation, reasoning that prolonged police custody would damage the vehicle's value and serve no practical purpose. The vehicle was released subject to conditions: a Rs. 5 lakh indemnity bond, undertaking not to sell/transfer without court permission, maintaining the vehicle in good condition, and producing it in court as directed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: Cri.M.A. No. 32/2026 (Maroti Fakira Thakare v. State) The court allowed Maroti Thakare's application for release of his seized Mahindra Bolero vehicle, finding him the rightful owner based on registration and identity documents. The court rejected the police's objections regarding evidence preservation, reasoning that prolonged police custody would damage the vehicle's value and serve no practical purpose. The vehicle was released subject to conditions: a Rs. 5 lakh indemnity bond, undertaking not to sell/transfer without court permission, maintaining the vehicle in good condition, and producing it in court as directed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts