The State of Maharashtra (Sakri) vs Vishnu Deoram Gaikawad Advocate - Salunke Mohandas B. — 112/2019
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 354,452,504. Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 23rd March 2026.
R.C.C. - Regular Criminal Case
CNR: MHDH050012692019
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
978/2019
Filing Date
03-09-2019
Registration No
112/2019
Registration Date
03-09-2019
Court
Civil Court Junior Division , Sakri
Judge
13-Jt Civil Judge JD and JMFC Sakri
Decision Date
23rd March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ACQUITTED
FIR Details
FIR Number
71
Police Station
Sakri
Year
2019
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
The State of Maharashtra (Sakri)
Adv. A.P.P. for State
Respondent(s)
Vishnu Deoram Gaikawad Advocate - Salunke Mohandas B.
Hearing History
Judge: 13-Jt Civil Judge JD and JMFC Sakri
Disposed
Evidence Part Heard
Hearing
Hearing
Hearing
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 23-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 09-03-2026 | Evidence Part Heard | |
| 07-03-2026 | Hearing | |
| 25-02-2026 | Hearing | |
| 03-02-2026 | Hearing |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The court acquitted the defendant Vishnu Devra Gayakwad of charges under Indian Penal Code sections 354 (outraging modesty), 452 (house trespass), and 504 (intentional insult). The court found that while the complainant and her family members initially alleged the defendant had entered their home, harassed the complainant, and made threatening remarks, they later compromised the matter and retracted their testimony during court proceedings. The court ruled that insufficient credible evidence remained to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, thereby granting the defendant acquittal. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The court acquitted the defendant Vishnu Devra Gayakwad of charges under Indian Penal Code sections 354 (outraging modesty), 452 (house trespass), and 504 (intentional insult). The court found that while the complainant and her family members initially alleged the defendant had entered their home, harassed the complainant, and made threatening remarks, they later compromised the matter and retracted their testimony during court proceedings. The court ruled that insufficient credible evidence remained to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, thereby granting the defendant acquittal. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts