State of Maharashtra, Thru Police Station Andhera vs Mukinda Suresh Salve Advocate - Thumake NR — 575/2023

Case under Maharashtra Prohibition Act Section 65D. Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 11th March 2026.

S.C.C. - Sum Case

CNR: MHBU150006182022

Case disposed

Filing Number

512/2022

Filing Date

16-07-2022

Registration No

575/2023

Registration Date

16-07-2022

Court

Civil Court Junior Division , Deulgaonraja

Judge

2-Jt.CIVIL JUDGE JR.DN. J.M.F.C.

Decision Date

11th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ACQUITTED

FIR Details

FIR Number

187

Police Station

Andhera

Year

2022

Acts & Sections

Maharashtra Prohibition Act Section 65D

Petitioner(s)

State of Maharashtra, Thru Police Station Andhera

Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

Mukinda Suresh Salve Advocate - Thumake NR

Hearing History

Judge: 2-Jt.CIVIL JUDGE JR.DN. J.M.F.C.

11-03-2026

Disposed

13-02-2026

Arguments

17-01-2026

Arguments

27-11-2025

Arguments

01-11-2025

Arguments

Final Orders / Judgements

11-03-2026
Copy of Judgment

Summary The court acquitted the accused Mukinda Suresh Salve of charges under the Maharashtra Prohibition Act, 1949, Section 65(D), finding that the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused illegally possessed and intended to sell 5 liters of liquor. The court noted critical evidentiary gaps: no independent witness was examined, no chemical analysis report was submitted, and the seizure panchnama witnesses were not properly examined regarding the illegal nature of the seized liquor, resulting in reasonable doubt about the legitimacy of the seizure itself. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Interim Orders

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The court acquitted the accused Mukinda Suresh Salve of charges under the Maharashtra Prohibition Act, 1949, Section 65(D), finding that the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused illegally possessed and intended to sell 5 liters of liquor. The court noted critical evidentiary gaps: no independent witness was examined, no chemical analysis report was submitted, and the seizure panchnama witnesses were not properly examined regarding the illegal nature of the seized liquor, resulting in reasonable doubt about the legitimacy of the seizure itself. 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

Civil Court Junior Division , Deulgaonraja All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case