The State of Maharashtra vs Sunitabai Bhaidas Netle — 199/2023

Case under Maharashtra Prohibition Act Section 65(e). Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 17th March 2026.

Case disposed

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

CNR: MHDH040005242023

Filing Number

378/2023

Filing Date

13-Jul-2023

Registration No

199/2023

Registration Date

13-Jul-2023

Court

Civil Court Junior Division , Dondaicha

Judge

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

Decision Date

17-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ACQUITTED

Last updated 13-Apr-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

13

Police Station

Dondaicha

Year

2023

Acts & Sections

Maharashtra Prohibition Act Section 65(e)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.The State of Maharashtra

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Sunitabai Bhaidas Netle

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 17-Mar-2026

    Copy of JudgmentView PDF

    Summary The court acquitted the accused, Sunitabai Bhaidas Netale, of charges under Section 65(E) of the Maharashtra Prohibition Act, finding that the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the prohibited liquor seized from her possession was genuine. The judge noted critical gaps in evidence, including the absence of a proper chemical analysis report of the seized liquid and the unreliability of the sole panchanama witness, concluding that the prosecution's case rested solely on the police complainant's testimony without corroborating physical or scientific evidence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 17-Mar-2026

    Disposed

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

  4. 12-Mar-2026

    Evidence Part Heard

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

  5. 09-Mar-2026

    EvidenceView PDF

  6. 09-Mar-2026

    Evidence

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

  7. 24-Feb-2026

    Evidence

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

  8. 13-Feb-2026

    EvidenceView PDF

  9. 13-Feb-2026

    Evidence

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

  10. 10-Feb-2026

    Evidence

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

  11. 07-Feb-2026

    Evidence

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

  12. 20-Jan-2026

    Evidence

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

  13. 24-Nov-2025

    B.W._Unready

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

  14. 07-Nov-2025

    B.W._Unready

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

  15. 10-Oct-2025

    B.W._Unready

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

  16. 26-Sep-2025

    B.W._Unready

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

  17. 08-Sep-2025

    Awaiting Summons

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

  18. 14-Aug-2025

    Awaiting Summons

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

  19. 02-Aug-2025

    Awaiting Summons

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

  20. 08-Jul-2025

    Awaiting Summons

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

  21. 14-May-2025

    Awaiting Summons

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

  22. 13-Mar-2025

    Awaiting Summons

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

  23. 23-Jan-2025

    Awaiting Summons

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

  24. 29-Nov-2024

    Awaiting Summons

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

  25. 06-Sep-2024

    Awaiting Summons

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

  26. 10-Jul-2024

    Awaiting Summons

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

  27. 24-Apr-2024

    Awaiting Summons

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

  28. 01-Mar-2024

    Awaiting Summons

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

  29. 02-Jan-2024

    Awaiting Summons

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

  30. 06-Nov-2023

    Awaiting Summons

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

  31. 06-Oct-2023

    Awaiting Summons

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

  32. 13-Jul-2023

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  33. 13-Jul-2023

    Case filed

    Registration No. 199/2023

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The court acquitted the accused, Sunitabai Bhaidas Netale, of charges under Section 65(E) of the Maharashtra Prohibition Act, finding that the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the prohibited liquor seized from her possession was genuine. The judge noted critical gaps in evidence, including the absence of a proper chemical analysis report of the seized liquid and the unreliability of the sole panchanama witness, concluding that the prosecution's case rested solely on the police complainant's testimony without corroborating physical or scientific evidence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case