STATE OF MAHARASHATRA vs Prashant Vachishta Navle Advocate - Kale S.R. — 149/2022
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 307,324,504,427,143,147,148,148,188,269,270. Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 14th May 2026.
Sessions Case
CNR: MHBI010030022022
Filing Number
1243/2022
Filing Date
18-08-2022
Registration No
149/2022
Registration Date
20-08-2022
Court
District and Sessions Court , Beed
Judge
12-DIST.JUDGE-1 ADDL.SESSIONS JUDGE, BEED.
Decision Date
14th May 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ACQUITTED
FIR Details
FIR Number
180
Police Station
Rural Police Station Beed
Year
2020
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
STATE OF MAHARASHATRA
Adv. Rakh B.S.
Respondent(s)
Prashant Vachishta Navle Advocate - Kale S.R.
Vishal laxman Alis Bandu Navle
Adv. Kale S.R.
Mahesh Madhukar Navle
Ankush Alis Gudya Alis Bablya Rajabhau Ghadge
Adv. Kolhe G.B.
Hearing History
Judge: 12-DIST.JUDGE-1 ADDL.SESSIONS JUDGE, BEED.
Disposed
Judgment
Arguments
Statement U/sec.313 Cr.P.C.
Statement U/sec.313 Cr.P.C.
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 14-05-2026 | Disposed |
| 12-05-2026 | Judgment |
| 04-05-2026 | Arguments |
| 02-05-2026 | Statement U/sec.313 Cr.P.C. |
| 27-04-2026 | Statement U/sec.313 Cr.P.C. |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The Sessions Court in Beed acquitted all four accused persons of charges including rioting, attempt to murder, and causing grievous hurt, finding material contradictions and omissions in witness testimony that prevented proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The court noted the informant did not know the accused beforehand, no test identification parade was conducted, and the alleged recovery of the stone weapon was suspicious, ultimately concluding the prosecution failed to establish its case. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The Sessions Court in Beed acquitted all four accused persons of charges including rioting, attempt to murder, and causing grievous hurt, finding material contradictions and omissions in witness testimony that prevented proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The court noted the informant did not know the accused beforehand, no test identification parade was conducted, and the alleged recovery of the stone weapon was suspicious, ultimately concluding the prosecution failed to establish its case. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts