State of Maharashtra. vs Eknath Bhimrao Solanke — 906/2023
Case under Maharashtra Prohibition Act Section 65 e. Disposed: Uncontested--DISPOSED OF OTHERWISE on 11th March 2026.
S.C.C. - Sum Case
CNR: MHBU060013092023
Filing Number
1309/2023
Filing Date
29-May-2023
Registration No
906/2023
Registration Date
29-May-2023
Court
Civil Court Junior Division , khamgaon
Judge
2-2nd Jt.Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) and J.m.f.c., Khamgaon
Decision Date
11-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--DISPOSED OF OTHERWISE
Last updated 20-May-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
641
Police Station
Khamgaon City Police Station
Year
2022
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.State of Maharashtra.
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
-
1.Eknath Bhimrao Solanke
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
11-Mar-2026
Order on ExhibitView PDF
Summary: The Judicial Magistrate of Khamgaon discharged accused Eknath Solanke from charges under Section 65(e) of the Bombay Prohibition Act and stopped proceedings under Section 258 of the CrPC. The court found the 3-year-old case unfruitful due to prosecution's failure to file a Competency Assessment (C.A.) report, secure the accused's presence, or examine witnesses despite opportunities, making further proceedings futile. The accused's bail bond was cancelled and perishable property ordered destroyed after the appeal period. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
11-Mar-2026
Disposed
2nd Jt.Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) and J.m.f.c., Khamgaon
-
10-Mar-2026
Appearance
2nd Jt.Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) and J.m.f.c., Khamgaon
-
30-Jan-2026
Appearance
2nd Jt.Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) and J.m.f.c., Khamgaon
-
30-Jun-2025
Appearance
Jt. Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) and J.m.f.c., Khamgaon
-
30-Jan-2025
Appearance
Jt. Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) and J.m.f.c., Khamgaon
-
30-Jan-2024
Appearance
Jt. Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) and J.m.f.c., Khamgaon
-
27-Jul-2023
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
29-May-2023
Case filed
Registration No. 906/2023
Summary: The Judicial Magistrate of Khamgaon discharged accused Eknath Solanke from charges under Section 65(e) of the Bombay Prohibition Act and stopped proceedings under Section 258 of the CrPC. The court found the 3-year-old case unfruitful due to prosecution's failure to file a Competency Assessment (C.A.) report, secure the accused's presence, or examine witnesses despite opportunities, making further proceedings futile. The accused's bail bond was cancelled and perishable property ordered destroyed after the appeal period. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts