The State Of Maharashtra vs Santosh Dagdu Bhosale Advocate - Deshmukh Sanjay Gunvantrao — 1782/2023
Case under Maharashtra Prohibition Act Section 65(e). Disposed: Uncontested--U/SEC. 258 OF CR.PC on 11th March 2026.
S.C.C. - Sum Case
CNR: MHBU130029452023
Filing Number
2569/2023
Filing Date
05-Dec-2023
Registration No
1782/2023
Registration Date
05-Dec-2023
Court
Civil Judge Junior Division , Chikhli
Judge
3-2nd Jt.Civil Judge Jr.Dn. and JMFC Chikhali
Decision Date
11-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--U/SEC. 258 OF CR.PC
Last updated 20-May-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
207
Police Station
Raipur
Year
2023
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.The State Of Maharashtra
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
-
1.Santosh Dagdu Bhosale Advocate - Deshmukh Sanjay Gunvantrao
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
11-Mar-2026
Order on ExhibitView PDF
The court discharged accused Santosh Dagdu Bhosale of charges under section 65(e) of the Maharashtra Prohibition Act for illegal possession of country liquor, because the prosecution failed to file a Chemical Analysis (C.A.) report to prove the seized material was actually liquor. The proceedings were stopped under section 258 of the CrPC, and seized liquor was directed to be sent to the State Excise Department for disposal. 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 JMFC Chikhali
-
20-Jan-2026
Plea / Particulars
2nd Jt.Civil Judge Jr.Dn. and JMFC Chikhali
-
26-Sep-2025
Plea / Particulars
2nd Jt.Civil Judge Jr.Dn. and JMFC Chikhali
-
26-May-2025
Plea / Particulars
Civil Judge Jr.Dn. And J.m.f.c., Chikhli
-
20-Dec-2024
Plea / Particulars
Civil Judge Jr.Dn. And J.m.f.c., Chikhli
-
27-May-2024
Plea / Particulars
Civil Judge Jr.Dn. And J.m.f.c., Chikhli
-
05-Dec-2023
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
05-Dec-2023
Case filed
Registration No. 1782/2023
The court discharged accused Santosh Dagdu Bhosale of charges under section 65(e) of the Maharashtra Prohibition Act for illegal possession of country liquor, because the prosecution failed to file a Chemical Analysis (C.A.) report to prove the seized material was actually liquor. The proceedings were stopped under section 258 of the CrPC, and seized liquor was directed to be sent to the State Excise Department for disposal. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts