The State Of Maharashtra vs Arun Subhash Matkar — 66/2025
Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 85,115(2),352,351(3),3(5). Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 02nd May 2026.
R.C.C. - Reg.Cri.Case
CNR: MHBU130004062025
Filing Number
370/2025
Filing Date
24-02-2025
Registration No
66/2025
Registration Date
24-02-2025
Court
Civil Judge Junior Division , Chikhli
Judge
2-Jt.Civil Judge Jr.Dn. and JMFC Chikhali
Decision Date
02nd May 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ACQUITTED
FIR Details
FIR Number
584
Police Station
Chikhli
Year
2024
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
The State Of Maharashtra
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
Arun Subhash Matkar
Usha Subhash Matkar
Subhash Niyaram Matkar
Gajanan Subhash Matkar
Ganesh Subhash Matkar
Balu Hari Gaikwad
Hearing History
Judge: 2-Jt.Civil Judge Jr.Dn. and JMFC Chikhali
Disposed
Arguments
Arguments
Arguments
Charge
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 02-05-2026 | Disposed |
| 11-03-2026 | Arguments |
| 26-02-2026 | Arguments |
| 11-02-2026 | Arguments |
| 03-11-2025 | Charge |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The court acquitted all six accused in a dowry harassment and cruelty case filed by a woman against her husband and in-laws. The judgment, issued on May 2, 2026, by the First Class Magistrate Court in Chikhali (Buldhana district, Maharashtra), found that the prosecution failed to establish sufficient evidence to prove the charges under Indian Penal Code sections 85, 115(2), 352, 351(2)(3), and 3(5) despite accepting the accused's crime scene statement. The complainant's own testimony lacked specific details about the alleged demand of ₹3 lakh for a car and the harassment she claimed to have suffered. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The court acquitted all six accused in a dowry harassment and cruelty case filed by a woman against her husband and in-laws. The judgment, issued on May 2, 2026, by the First Class Magistrate Court in Chikhali (Buldhana district, Maharashtra), found that the prosecution failed to establish sufficient evidence to prove the charges under Indian Penal Code sections 85, 115(2), 352, 351(2)(3), and 3(5) despite accepting the accused's crime scene statement. The complainant's own testimony lacked specific details about the alleged demand of ₹3 lakh for a car and the harassment she claimed to have suffered. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts