The State of Maharashtra vs Hemantkumar Prabhakar Patil Advocate - Mehta N. P. — 165/2024

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 376(1),354,354(a),354(b),354(d),509,506. Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 18th March 2026.

Case disposed

Sessions Case

CNR: MHDH010042412024

Filing Number

1821/2024

Filing Date

10-Dec-2024

Registration No

165/2024

Registration Date

10-Dec-2024

Court

District and Session Court ,Dhule

Judge

3-District Judge 3 and Additional Sessions Judge Dhule

Decision Date

18-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ACQUITTED

Last updated 13-Apr-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

281

Police Station

Deopur

Year

2023

Acts & Sections

Indian Penal Code Section 376(1),354,354(a),354(b),354(d),509,506

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.The State of Maharashtra

    Adv. A.G.P. 1 for the State

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Hemantkumar Prabhakar Patil Advocate - Mehta N. P.

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 18-Mar-2026

    Copy of JudgmentView PDF

    Court Decision Summary The Additional Sessions Judge, Dhule, acquitted Hemantkumar Prabhakar Patil of all charges under IPC sections 376(1), 354-A, 354-B, 354-D, 509, 506 and IT Act sections 67, 67-A. The court found the prosecutrix (victim) turned hostile and retracted her allegations, with her in-court testimony completely contradicting the FIR; medical evidence was inconclusive and merely corroborative; and no legally admissible electronic evidence was produced. Since the prosecution failed to prove charges beyond reasonable doubt, the accused was acquitted. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 18-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    District Judge 3 and Additional Sessions Judge Dhule

  4. 12-Mar-2026

    Judgment

    District Judge 3 and Additional Sessions Judge Dhule

  5. 09-Mar-2026

    Arguments

    District Judge 3 and Additional Sessions Judge Dhule

  6. 02-Mar-2026

    Statement U/sec.313 Cr.P.C.

    District Judge 3 and Additional Sessions Judge Dhule

  7. 23-Jan-2026

    Statement U/sec.313 Cr.P.C.

    District Judge 3 and Additional Sessions Judge Dhule

  8. 17-Jan-2026

    Evidence Part Heard

    District Judge 3 and Additional Sessions Judge Dhule

  9. 08-Jan-2026

    Evidence Part Heard

    District Judge 3 and Additional Sessions Judge Dhule

  10. 02-Jan-2026

    Evidence Part Heard

    District Judge 3 and Additional Sessions Judge Dhule

  11. 15-Dec-2025

    Evidence Part Heard

    District Judge 3 and Additional Sessions Judge Dhule

  12. 08-Dec-2025

    Evidence Part Heard

    District Judge 3 and Additional Sessions Judge Dhule

  13. 25-Nov-2025

    Evidence Part Heard

    District Judge 3 and Additional Sessions Judge Dhule

  14. 17-Nov-2025

    Evidence Part Heard

    District Judge 3 and Additional Sessions Judge Dhule

  15. 07-Nov-2025

    Evidence

    District Judge 3 and Additional Sessions Judge Dhule

  16. 16-Oct-2025

    Evidence

    District Judge 3 and Additional Sessions Judge Dhule

  17. 13-Oct-2025

    Report

    District Judge 3 and Additional Sessions Judge Dhule

  18. 22-Sep-2025

    Report

    District Judge 3 and Additional Sessions Judge Dhule

  19. 15-Jul-2025

    Charge

    Principal District and Sessions Judge Dhule

  20. 21-May-2025

    Charge

    Principal District and Sessions Judge Dhule

  21. 25-Mar-2025

    Charge

    Principal District and Sessions Judge Dhule

  22. 20-Jan-2025

    Charge

    Principal District and Sessions Judge Dhule

  23. 18-Dec-2024

    Charge

    Principal District and Sessions Judge Dhule

  24. 10-Dec-2024

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  25. 10-Dec-2024

    Case filed

    Registration No. 165/2024

casestatus.in Summary

Court Decision Summary The Additional Sessions Judge, Dhule, acquitted Hemantkumar Prabhakar Patil of all charges under IPC sections 376(1), 354-A, 354-B, 354-D, 509, 506 and IT Act sections 67, 67-A. The court found the prosecutrix (victim) turned hostile and retracted her allegations, with her in-court testimony completely contradicting the FIR; medical evidence was inconclusive and merely corroborative; and no legally admissible electronic evidence was produced. Since the prosecution failed to prove charges beyond reasonable doubt, the accused was acquitted. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case