The State of Maharashtra vs Ramchandra Vaman Patil — 106/2025

Case under Maharashtra Prohibition Act Section 65(e). Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 09th March 2026.

S.C.C. - Summons/Summary Criminal Case

CNR: MHDH040003852025

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

232/2025

Filing Date

18-07-2025

Registration No

106/2025

Registration Date

18-07-2025

Court

Civil Court Junior Division , Dondaicha

Judge

1-Civil Judge J. D. and J.M.F.C.Dondaicha

Decision Date

09th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ACQUITTED

FIR Details

FIR Number

66

Police Station

Excise Shirpur

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

MAHARASHTRA PROHIBITION ACT Section 65(e)

Petitioner(s)

The State of Maharashtra

Adv. A.P.P. for State

Respondent(s)

Ramchandra Vaman Patil

Hearing History

Judge: 1-Civil Judge J. D. and J.M.F.C.Dondaicha

09-03-2026

Disposed

05-03-2026

Evidence Part Heard

24-02-2026

Evidence Part Heard

06-02-2026

Evidence

29-01-2026

Evidence

Final Orders / Judgements

09-03-2026
Copy of Judgment

Court Judgment Summary The court acquitted accused Ramchandra Vaman Patil of charges under the Maharashtra Prohibition Act, Section 65(E), finding that the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the contraband liquor was recovered from the accused's possession or that it was prohibited under law, as no chemical analysis report was produced and the panch witnesses' testimony did not corroborate the complainant's claims. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Interim Orders

20-01-2026
Evidence
24-02-2026
Evidence
24-02-2026
Evidence
casestatus.in Summary

Court Judgment Summary The court acquitted accused Ramchandra Vaman Patil of charges under the Maharashtra Prohibition Act, Section 65(E), finding that the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the contraband liquor was recovered from the accused's possession or that it was prohibited under law, as no chemical analysis report was produced and the panch witnesses' testimony did not corroborate the complainant's claims. 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 , Dondaicha All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case