State of Maharashtra Through P.S. Akot Gramin vs Sau. Shital Nitin Kokate — 96/2024

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 324,504,34. Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 06th March 2026.

R.C.C. - Reg.Cri.Case

CNR: MHAK060012672024

Case disposed

Filing Number

745/2024

Filing Date

20-05-2024

Registration No

96/2024

Registration Date

20-05-2024

Court

Civil Court Junior Division , Akot

Judge

3-2nd Jt. Civil Judge J.D. J.M.F.C. Akot

Decision Date

06th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ACQUITTED

Acts & Sections

Indian Penal Code Section 324,504,34

Petitioner(s)

State of Maharashtra Through P.S. Akot Gramin

Adv. A.G.P./A.P.P

Respondent(s)

Sau. Shital Nitin Kokate

Nitin Uttamrao Kokate

Hearing History

Judge: 3-2nd Jt. Civil Judge J.D. J.M.F.C. Akot

06-03-2026

Disposed

20-02-2026

Evidence Part Heard

12-02-2026

Evidence Part Heard

20-01-2026

Evidence Part Heard

19-12-2025

Evidence Part Heard

Final Orders / Judgements

06-03-2026
Copy of Judgment

Summary The court acquitted both defendants, Shital Nitin Kokate and Nitin Uttamrao Kokate, of charges under IPC Sections 324 and 504 with Section 34. The court found that the prosecution failed to establish its case beyond reasonable doubt, as the complainant's testimony was inconsistent with his initial complaint, the panch witness denied witnessing the alleged crime scene and seizure proceedings, and crucial documentary evidence could not prove the charges despite the defendants accepting its validity. The court ruled that the charges were not sufficiently substantiated by credible evidence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Interim Orders

04-12-2025
Evidence
20-01-2026
Evidence
casestatus.in Summary

Summary The court acquitted both defendants, Shital Nitin Kokate and Nitin Uttamrao Kokate, of charges under IPC Sections 324 and 504 with Section 34. The court found that the prosecution failed to establish its case beyond reasonable doubt, as the complainant's testimony was inconsistent with his initial complaint, the panch witness denied witnessing the alleged crime scene and seizure proceedings, and crucial documentary evidence could not prove the charges despite the defendants accepting its validity. The court ruled that the charges were not sufficiently substantiated by credible evidence. 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 , Akot All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case