State of Maharashtra Through P S O PS Shirpur vs Krushna Dadarao Deshmukh — 204/2020
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 420,409,465,466,471,34. Status: Appearance. Next hearing: 20th June 2026.
R.C.C. - Regular Criminal Case
CNR: MHWS100014822020
Next Hearing
20th June 2026
Filing Number
1349/2020
Filing Date
12-11-2020
Registration No
204/2020
Registration Date
12-11-2020
Court
Civil Judge Junior Division, Malegaon
Judge
2-Jt. CIVIL JUDGE J.D. J.M.F.C.MALEGAON
FIR Details
FIR Number
73
Police Station
JAULKA
Year
2020
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State of Maharashtra Through P S O PS (Police Station) Shirpur
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
Krushna Dadarao Deshmukh
Vinod Sambhaji Agase
Sandip Ramchandra Kotkar
Subhas Motiram Ingle
Sagar G. Ingole
Vaijyanath Vishwanath Ingle
Dhananjay Dnyanba Borkar
Hearing History
Judge: 2-Jt. CIVIL JUDGE J.D. J.M.F.C.MALEGAON
Appearance
Appearance
Appearance
Appearance
Charge
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 18-05-2026 | Appearance |
| 15-04-2026 | Appearance |
| 16-03-2026 | Appearance |
| 10-02-2026 | Appearance |
| 07-01-2026 | Charge |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: RCC No. 204/2020 Accused No. 2 (Vinod Sambhaji Agase) filed an application seeking permission to withdraw Rs. 10,000 from his frozen bank account and to defreeze the account, claiming he needed the funds to start a bakery business after undergoing training during his 27-month magistrate custody remand. The Investigating Officer objected, stating the frozen amount (Rs. 10,369) constituted evidence of public money involved in the crime. The court rejected the application, finding that the charge-sheet revealed public money was involved, the accused failed to justify why the account defreeze was necessary, and no documentary evidence supported his claim of undergoing business training in custody. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: RCC No. 204/2020 Accused No. 2 (Vinod Sambhaji Agase) filed an application seeking permission to withdraw Rs. 10,000 from his frozen bank account and to defreeze the account, claiming he needed the funds to start a bakery business after undergoing training during his 27-month magistrate custody remand. The Investigating Officer objected, stating the frozen amount (Rs. 10,369) constituted evidence of public money involved in the crime. The court rejected the application, finding that the charge-sheet revealed public money was involved, the accused failed to justify why the account defreeze was necessary, and no documentary evidence supported his claim of undergoing business training in custody. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts