State Of Mahrashtra Through PSO Shegaon City vs Gajanan Rambhau Bawaskar Advocate - Talnikar BP — 737/2021
Case under Maharashtra Prevention of Gambling Act Section 12(a). Status: Evidence Part Heard. Next hearing: 20th June 2026.
S.C.C. - Sum Case
CNR: MHBU070014042021
Next Hearing
20th June 2026
Filing Number
1277/2021
Filing Date
19-07-2021
Registration No
737/2021
Registration Date
19-07-2021
Court
Civil Court Junior Division , shegaon
Judge
1-Civil Judge Jr.Dn. J.M.F.C. Shegaon
FIR Details
FIR Number
257
Police Station
Shegaon
Year
2021
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State Of Mahrashtra Through PSO Shegaon City
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
Gajanan Rambhau Bawaskar Advocate - Talnikar BP
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Civil Judge Jr.Dn. J.M.F.C. Shegaon
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 27-04-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
| 11-03-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
| 20-01-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
| 15-11-2025 | Evidence Part Heard |
| 11-08-2025 | Evidence |
Interim Orders
Summary In this criminal case (No. 737/2021), the court examined witness testimony from Ambadas Hari Babulkar regarding a seizure panchnama dated 03.05.2021. The witness categorically denied his presence at the scene and refuted all allegations that he participated in the recovery of cash (₹370) and other items from the accused. The court accepted the witness's testimony as credible, finding no evidence to support the prosecution's claims about his involvement in the seizure proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary In this criminal case (No. 737/2021), the court examined witness testimony from Ambadas Hari Babulkar regarding a seizure panchnama dated 03.05.2021. The witness categorically denied his presence at the scene and refuted all allegations that he participated in the recovery of cash (₹370) and other items from the accused. The court accepted the witness's testimony as credible, finding no evidence to support the prosecution's claims about his involvement in the seizure proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts