State of Maharashtra vs Ganesh Shankar Aute — 1345/2024
Case under Maharashtra Prohibition Act Section 65E. Disposed: Uncontested--U/SEC. 258 OF CR.PC on 12th March 2026.
S.C.C. - Summons/Summary Criminal Case
CNR: MHAU090028432024
Filing Number
2043/2024
Filing Date
21-Oct-2024
Registration No
1345/2024
Registration Date
21-Oct-2024
Court
Civil and Criminal Court, Paithan
Judge
3-CIVIL Judge J.D. And J.M.F.C. Paithan
Decision Date
12-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--U/SEC. 258 OF CR.PC
Last updated 29-May-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
206
Police Station
State Excise
Year
2024
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.State of Maharashtra
Adv. Shimpi A.Y.
Respondent(s)
-
1.Ganesh Shankar Aute
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
12-Mar-2026
Order on ExhibitView PDF
The court dismissed the case against accused Ganesh Shankar Aute under Section 258 of the Cr.P.C. due to prolonged pendency since 2024, the accused's continued absence, and the prosecution's failure to file the required Complaint Agent (C.A.) report despite being given one year to do so. The accused was discharged, and the seized property (muddemal) was directed to be sent to the Excise Collector, Aurangabad for legal disposal after the appeal period expires. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
12-Mar-2026
Disposed
CIVIL Judge J.D. And J.M.F.C. Paithan
-
08-Jan-2026
Awaiting Summons
CIVIL Judge J.D. And J.M.F.C. Paithan
-
08-Oct-2025
Awaiting Summons
CIVIL Judge J.D. And J.M.F.C. Paithan
-
08-Aug-2025
Awaiting Summons
CIVIL Judge J.D. And J.M.F.C. Paithan
-
09-May-2025
Appearance
CIVIL Judge J.D. And J.M.F.C. Paithan
-
10-Feb-2025
Appearance
CIVIL Judge J.D. And J.M.F.C. Paithan
-
20-Nov-2024
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
21-Oct-2024
Case filed
Registration No. 1345/2024
The court dismissed the case against accused Ganesh Shankar Aute under Section 258 of the Cr.P.C. due to prolonged pendency since 2024, the accused's continued absence, and the prosecution's failure to file the required Complaint Agent (C.A.) report despite being given one year to do so. The accused was discharged, and the seized property (muddemal) was directed to be sent to the Excise Collector, Aurangabad for legal disposal after the appeal period expires. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts