The State of Maharashtra vs Avinash @ Akshay Ashok Chavan and 3 other Advocate - Kale B. S. — 296/2019
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 354D,506,34,. Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 04th April 2026.
Spl.Case - Special Case (Sessions)
CNR: MHAH130009122019
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
656/2019
Filing Date
26-11-2019
Registration No
296/2019
Registration Date
26-11-2019
Court
District and Sessions Court, Newasa.
Judge
1-Dist. Judge-1 And Addl. Sessions Judge, Newasa
Decision Date
04th April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ACQUITTED
FIR Details
FIR Number
29
Police Station
Sonai Police Station
Year
2019
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
The State of Maharashtra
Adv. Bhorde V. K.
Respondent(s)
Avinash @ Akshay Ashok Chavan and 3 other Advocate - Kale B. S.
Akshay Babasaheb Darkunde
Adv. Kale B. S.
Dnyaneshwar Dagdu Barde
Adv. Kale B. S.
Vikas Pandurang Jadhav
Adv. Kale B. S.
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Dist. Judge-1 And Addl. Sessions Judge, Newasa
Disposed
Judgment
Judgment
Arguments
Arguments
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 04-04-2026 | Disposed | |
| 02-04-2026 | Judgment | |
| 01-04-2026 | Judgment | |
| 27-03-2026 | Arguments | |
| 16-03-2026 | Arguments |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The Special Judge (POCSO Act) at Newasa acquitted all four accused of charges under IPC Sections 354(D) & 506 (read with 34) and POCSO Act Section 12. The court found the victim's testimony inconsistent across her FIR, recorded statement, and court deposition regarding allegations of stalking and harassment, and noted the prosecution failed to examine corroborating witnesses despite their availability. Due to these credibility issues and insufficient evidence, the court concluded the prosecution failed to prove the accused followed the victim with intent to foster relations or outrage her modesty. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
Summary The Special Judge (POCSO Act) at Newasa acquitted all four accused of charges under IPC Sections 354(D) & 506 (read with 34) and POCSO Act Section 12. The court found the victim's testimony inconsistent across her FIR, recorded statement, and court deposition regarding allegations of stalking and harassment, and noted the prosecution failed to examine corroborating witnesses despite their availability. Due to these credibility issues and insufficient evidence, the court concluded the prosecution failed to prove the accused followed the victim with intent to foster relations or outrage her modesty. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts