State of Maharashtra vs Jeevan Jagannath Badwane — 85/2026

Case under Motor Vehicles Act Section 239,177. Disposed: Uncontested--U/SEC. 258 OF CR.PC on 04th May 2026.

Case disposed

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

CNR: MHAU100002492026

Filing Number

205/2026

Filing Date

06-Mar-2026

Registration No

85/2026

Registration Date

06-Mar-2026

Court

Civil and Criminal Court, Khultabad

Judge

2-CIVIL Judge J.D. And J.m.f.c., Khultabad.

Decision Date

04-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

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

Last updated 29-May-2026

FIR Details

Police Station

Khultabad

Year

0

Acts & Sections

Motor Vehicles Act Section 239,177

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.State of Maharashtra

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Jeevan Jagannath Badwane

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 04-May-2026

    Order on ExhibitView PDF

    Case Summary: State of Maharashtra v. Jeevan Jagannath Badwane (85/2026) The Judicial Magistrate at Khultabad discharged the accused and stopped proceedings under Section 258 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The prosecution failed to secure the accused's presence despite ample opportunities given, causing the matter to remain pending without progress. The accused was chargesheeted for Motor Vehicle Act violations (Section 239/177), but the court found insufficient reason to continue the proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 04-May-2026

    Disposed

    CIVIL Judge J.D. And J.m.f.c., Khultabad.

  4. 12-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  5. 06-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 85/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: State of Maharashtra v. Jeevan Jagannath Badwane (85/2026) The Judicial Magistrate at Khultabad discharged the accused and stopped proceedings under Section 258 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The prosecution failed to secure the accused's presence despite ample opportunities given, causing the matter to remain pending without progress. The accused was chargesheeted for Motor Vehicle Act violations (Section 239/177), but the court found insufficient reason to continue the proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case