State of Maharashtra, Thru Police Station Andhera vs Sushil Gokul Avchar Advocate - Ghewande PB — 158/2022
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 279,304-A,338,337. Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 04th May 2026.
R.C.C. - Reg.Cri.Case
CNR: MHBU150004162022
Filing Number
331/2022
Filing Date
07-06-2022
Registration No
158/2022
Registration Date
07-06-2022
Court
Civil Court Junior Division , Deulgaonraja
Judge
2-Jt.CIVIL JUDGE JR.DN. J.M.F.C.
Decision Date
04th May 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ACQUITTED
FIR Details
FIR Number
57
Police Station
Andhera
Year
2022
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State of Maharashtra, Thru Police Station Andhera
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
Sushil Gokul Avchar Advocate - Ghewande PB
Hearing History
Judge: 2-Jt.CIVIL JUDGE JR.DN. J.M.F.C.
Disposed
Arguments
Arguments
Arguments
Arguments
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 04-05-2026 | Disposed |
| 08-04-2026 | Arguments |
| 11-03-2026 | Arguments |
| 20-02-2026 | Arguments |
| 17-01-2026 | Arguments |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The court acquitted bus driver Sushil Gokul Avchar of charges under sections 304-A (causing death by negligence), 279, 337, and 338 of the Indian Penal Code for a fatal traffic accident on February 14, 2022. The court found insufficient evidence that the accused was driving recklessly or at high speed, noting critical gaps in the prosecution's case: no direct evidence identifying which specific bus hit the motorcycle, the investigating officer failed to confirm the accused was driving the bus that day, and vital witnesses (scene panchas, inquest panchas, and ST depot staff) were not examined. The court concluded the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The court acquitted bus driver Sushil Gokul Avchar of charges under sections 304-A (causing death by negligence), 279, 337, and 338 of the Indian Penal Code for a fatal traffic accident on February 14, 2022. The court found insufficient evidence that the accused was driving recklessly or at high speed, noting critical gaps in the prosecution's case: no direct evidence identifying which specific bus hit the motorcycle, the investigating officer failed to confirm the accused was driving the bus that day, and vital witnesses (scene panchas, inquest panchas, and ST depot staff) were not examined. The court concluded the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts