The State of Maharashtra vs Shantwan Fransis Jadhav Advocate - NIL — 140/2025

Case under Maharashtra Prohibition Act Section 65e. Disposed: Uncontested--U/SEC. 258 OF CR.PC on 09th March 2026.

Case disposed

S.C.C. - Summons/Summary Criminal Case

CNR: MHAH150002172025

Filing Number

217/2025

Filing Date

04-Feb-2025

Registration No

140/2025

Registration Date

04-Feb-2025

Court

Civil Court Junior Division , Newasa

Judge

2-2nd Jt.Civil Judge Jd JMFC Newasa

Decision Date

09-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--U/SEC. 258 OF CR.PC

Last updated 14-Apr-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

634

Police Station

Newasa Police Station Newasa

Year

2024

Acts & Sections

Maharashtra Prohibition Act Section 65e

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.The State of Maharashtra

    Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Shantwan Fransis Jadhav Advocate - NIL

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 09-Mar-2026

    Order on ExhibitView PDF

    Summary: The court discharged the accused Shantwan Fransis Jadhav and stopped the proceeding under Section 258 CrPC in a case involving alleged violation of Section 65(e) of the Bombay Prohibition Act, 1949. The discharge was granted because the prosecution failed to file the mandatory chemical analyzer report despite repeated opportunities, rendering the case incapable of proceeding further. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 09-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    2nd Jt.Civil Judge Jd JMFC Newasa

  4. 25-Feb-2026

    Awaiting Summons

    2nd Jt.Civil Judge Jd JMFC Newasa

  5. 10-Nov-2025

    Awaiting Summons

    2nd Jt.Civil Judge Jd JMFC Newasa

  6. 29-Jul-2025

    Awaiting Summons

    2nd Jt.Civil Judge Jd JMFC Newasa

  7. 22-May-2025

    Awaiting Summons

    2nd Jt.Civil Judge Jd JMFC Newasa

  8. 11-Feb-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  9. 04-Feb-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. 140/2025

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The court discharged the accused Shantwan Fransis Jadhav and stopped the proceeding under Section 258 CrPC in a case involving alleged violation of Section 65(e) of the Bombay Prohibition Act, 1949. The discharge was granted because the prosecution failed to file the mandatory chemical analyzer report despite repeated opportunities, rendering the case incapable of proceeding further. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case