State of Maharashtra vs Ishwar Chotu Mali — 306/2025

Case under Maharashtra Prohibition Act Section 65(e). Disposed: Uncontested--ALLOWED OTHERWISE on 09th March 2026.

Case disposed

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

CNR: MHDH060012542025

Filing Number

706/2025

Filing Date

10-Dec-2025

Registration No

306/2025

Registration Date

10-Dec-2025

Court

Civil Court Junior Division , Shindkheda

Judge

6-Joint Civil Judge J.D. and J.M.F.C Shindkheda

Decision Date

09-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--ALLOWED OTHERWISE

Last updated 13-Apr-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

264

Police Station

Shindkheda

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

Maharashtra Prohibition Act Section 65(e)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.State of Maharashtra

    Adv. A.P.P. for State

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Ishwar Chotu Mali

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 09-Mar-2026

    Order on ExhibitView PDF

    The Judicial Magistrate First Class at Shindkheda discharged the accused Ishwar Chhotu Mali of offences under Section 65(E) of the Maharashtra Prohibition Act and disposed of the case under Section 258 of the Criminal Procedure Code due to the prosecution's failure to secure his presence despite repeated summons. The court found no purpose in keeping the case pending and cancelled any bail bonds furnished by the accused. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 09-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Joint Civil Judge J.D. and J.M.F.C Shindkheda

  4. 30-Jan-2026

    Awaiting Summons

    Joint Civil Judge J.D. and J.M.F.C Shindkheda

  5. 10-Dec-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 10-Dec-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. 306/2025

casestatus.in Summary

The Judicial Magistrate First Class at Shindkheda discharged the accused Ishwar Chhotu Mali of offences under Section 65(E) of the Maharashtra Prohibition Act and disposed of the case under Section 258 of the Criminal Procedure Code due to the prosecution's failure to secure his presence despite repeated summons. The court found no purpose in keeping the case pending and cancelled any bail bonds furnished by the accused. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case