State of Maharashtra vs Mohammad Shakil Mohammad Musa Advocate - Rawat SD — 12/2022

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 353,332,341,506,34. Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 18th March 2026.

Sessions Case

CNR: MHBU110001632022

Case disposed

Filing Number

93/2022

Filing Date

09-03-2022

Registration No

12/2022

Registration Date

09-03-2022

Court

District and Sessions Judge, Malkapur

Judge

2-Adhoc District Judge-1 and Addl. Sessions Judge

Decision Date

18th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ACQUITTED

FIR Details

FIR Number

157

Police Station

Dhamangaon Badhe

Year

2017

Acts & Sections

Indian Penal Code Section 353,332,341,506,34

Petitioner(s)

State of Maharashtra

Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

Mohammad Shakil Mohammad Musa Advocate - Rawat SD

Mohammad Saddam Mohammd Alim

Adv. Rawat SD

Hearing History

Judge: 2-Adhoc District Judge-1 and Addl. Sessions Judge

18-03-2026

Disposed

17-03-2026

Arguments

16-03-2026

Arguments

11-03-2026

Arguments

10-03-2026

Evidence Part Heard

Final Orders / Judgements

18-03-2026
Copy of Judgment

Court Decision Summary The Additional Sessions Court, Malkapur acquitted both accused (Mohammad Shakil Mohammad Musa and Mohammad Saddam Mohammad Alim) of charges under IPC Sections 353, 332, 341, and 506 r/w 34. The court found insufficient corroborated evidence that the informant was discharging his official duty as a forest guard when allegedly assaulted, and concluded the prosecution failed to prove the assault or threats beyond reasonable doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Interim Orders

24-11-2025
Evidence
24-11-2025
Evidence
17-12-2025
Evidence
17-12-2025
Evidence
16-02-2026
Evidence
10-03-2026
Evidence
casestatus.in Summary

Court Decision Summary The Additional Sessions Court, Malkapur acquitted both accused (Mohammad Shakil Mohammad Musa and Mohammad Saddam Mohammad Alim) of charges under IPC Sections 353, 332, 341, and 506 r/w 34. The court found insufficient corroborated evidence that the informant was discharging his official duty as a forest guard when allegedly assaulted, and concluded the prosecution failed to prove the assault or threats beyond reasonable doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

District and Sessions Judge, Malkapur All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case