State of Maharashtra vs Sumedh Devendra Magre — 342/2026

Case under Motor Vehicles Act Section 128(1)/194(C). Disposed: Uncontested--REJECTED on 12th March 2026.

Case disposed

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

CNR: MHAU090007212026

Filing Number

551/2026

Filing Date

04-Mar-2026

Registration No

342/2026

Registration Date

05-Mar-2026

Court

Civil and Criminal Court, Paithan

Judge

4-Jt. CIVIL Judge J.D. And J.M.F.C. Paithan

Decision Date

12-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--REJECTED

Last updated 29-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Motor Vehicles Act Section 128(1)/194(C)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.State of Maharashtra

    Adv. Shinde Apparao R.

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Sumedh Devendra Magre

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 12-Mar-2026

    Order on ExhibitView PDF

    The court rejected the traffic violation case filed by Maharashtra Police against Sumedh Devendra Magre for driving contrary to traffic rules. The Judicial Magistrate found the police report deficient as a chargesheet—it lacked critical details including place of offense, date of offense, and who actually drove the vehicle, with only the vehicle owner's name mentioned. Since no proper chargesheet with supporting documents was filed, cognizance could not be taken, and the case was rejected under Section 226 of B.N.S.S. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 12-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Jt. CIVIL Judge J.D. And J.M.F.C. Paithan

  4. 04-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 342/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The court rejected the traffic violation case filed by Maharashtra Police against Sumedh Devendra Magre for driving contrary to traffic rules. The Judicial Magistrate found the police report deficient as a chargesheet—it lacked critical details including place of offense, date of offense, and who actually drove the vehicle, with only the vehicle owner's name mentioned. Since no proper chargesheet with supporting documents was filed, cognizance could not be taken, and the case was rejected under Section 226 of B.N.S.S. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case