The State of Maharashtra vs Sunil Mansaram Shewale Advocate - Sonawane Ravindra S. — 224/2023
Case under Indian Electricity Act Section 135. Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 16th March 2026.
Spl.Case - Special Case (Sessions)
CNR: MHDH010042642023
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
1745/2023
Filing Date
05-12-2023
Registration No
224/2023
Registration Date
05-12-2023
Court
District and Session Court ,Dhule
Judge
32-Ad-hoc District Judge -1 and Addl. Sessions Judge, Dhule
Decision Date
16th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ACQUITTED
FIR Details
FIR Number
353
Police Station
West Deopur
Year
2022
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
The State of Maharashtra
Adv. Purohit Vaibhav S.
Respondent(s)
Sunil Mansaram Shewale Advocate - Sonawane Ravindra S.
Hearing History
Judge: 32-Ad-hoc District Judge -1 and Addl. Sessions Judge, Dhule
Disposed
Arguments
Statement U/sec.313 Cr.P.C.
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 16-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 12-03-2026 | Arguments | |
| 09-03-2026 | Statement U/sec.313 Cr.P.C. | |
| 27-02-2026 | Evidence Part Heard | |
| 20-02-2026 | Evidence |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The court acquitted the accused Sunil Mansaram Shevale of electricity theft charges under the Indian Electricity Act, 2003, Section 135, finding that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. Although evidence suggested meter tampering to reduce electricity recording, the court noted that the complainant and witnesses later admitted the accused had settled the electricity theft bill and penalty amount with the distribution company, leaving no pending grievance. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The court acquitted the accused Sunil Mansaram Shevale of electricity theft charges under the Indian Electricity Act, 2003, Section 135, finding that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. Although evidence suggested meter tampering to reduce electricity recording, the court noted that the complainant and witnesses later admitted the accused had settled the electricity theft bill and penalty amount with the distribution company, leaving no pending grievance. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts