The State of Maharashtra vs Yogesh Sopan Kharat Advocate - NIL — 375/2023

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 324,323,504,506. Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 09th March 2026.

R.C.C. - Regular Criminal Case

CNR: MHAH150019062023

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

1904/2023

Filing Date

27-10-2023

Registration No

375/2023

Registration Date

27-10-2023

Court

Civil Court Junior Division , Newasa

Judge

2-2nd Jt.Civil Judge JD JMFC Newasa

Decision Date

09th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ACQUITTED

FIR Details

FIR Number

291

Police Station

Sonai Police Station

Year

2023

Acts & Sections

INDIAN PENAL CODE Section 324,323,504,506

Petitioner(s)

The State of Maharashtra

Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

Yogesh Sopan Kharat Advocate - NIL

Jyoti Yogesh Kharat

Adv. NIL

Surekha Laxman Kharat

Adv. NIL

Rukhamini @ Rakhamabai Sopan Kharat

Adv. NIL

Hearing History

Judge: 2-2nd Jt.Civil Judge JD JMFC Newasa

09-03-2026

Disposed

04-03-2026

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

06-02-2026

Hearing

12-01-2026

Hearing

28-11-2025

Hearing

Final Orders / Judgements

09-03-2026
Copy of Judgment

Court Judgment Summary The Nevasа First Class Magistrate Court acquitted all four accused under IPC sections 324, 323, 504, 506, and 34, finding insufficient evidence to prove the charges of causing hurt, criminal intimidation, and criminal intimidation with common intention. The court noted that while the complainant and injured witness gave testimonies, they later contradicted their earlier statements and revealed that the parties had settled their dispute amicably before trial. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Interim Orders

02-09-2025
Charge
04-03-2026
Evidence
04-03-2026
Evidence
casestatus.in Summary

Court Judgment Summary The Nevasа First Class Magistrate Court acquitted all four accused under IPC sections 324, 323, 504, 506, and 34, finding insufficient evidence to prove the charges of causing hurt, criminal intimidation, and criminal intimidation with common intention. The court noted that while the complainant and injured witness gave testimonies, they later contradicted their earlier statements and revealed that the parties had settled their dispute amicably before trial. 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 , Newasa All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case