State of Maharashtra Through PSO Aheri vs Sandip Manohar Madavi Advocate - R.M.Menganwar — 248/2022
Case under Maharashtra Prohibition Act Section 65(e). Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 05th May 2026.
S.C.C. - Summons/Summary Criminal Case
CNR: MHGA070005192022
Filing Number
454/2022
Filing Date
16-Jun-2022
Registration No
248/2022
Registration Date
16-Jun-2022
Court
Civil Court Junior Divion ,Aheri
Judge
1-Civil Judge Jr.Dn. J.M.F.C. Aheri.
Decision Date
05-May-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ACQUITTED
Last updated 29-May-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
89
Police Station
Aheri
Year
2022
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.State of Maharashtra Through PSO Aheri
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
-
1.Sandip Manohar Madavi Advocate - R.M.Menganwar
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
05-May-2026
Copy of JudgmentView PDF
Summary of Case 248/2022 The First Class Judicial Magistrate at Aheri acquitted accused Sandip Manohar Madavi of charges under the Maharashtra Prohibition Act, 1949 (Section 65E), finding that the prosecution failed to establish its case beyond reasonable doubt. Although 30 liters of illicit liquor was allegedly seized from the accused's residence on 22.02.2022, the court noted critical evidentiary gaps: the investigating officer's testimony was not recorded, independent witnesses were not examined, and chemical analysis reports alone were insufficient to prove the recovered liquid was country liquor. The court held that without corroborating testimony and substantive evidence, the prosecution could not discharge its burden of proof, warranting the accused's acquittal under CrPC Section 255(1). This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
05-May-2026
Disposed
Civil Judge Jr.Dn. J.M.F.C. Aheri.
-
06-Apr-2026
Judgment
Civil Judge Jr.Dn. J.M.F.C. Aheri.
-
12-Mar-2026
Arguments
Civil Judge Jr.Dn. J.M.F.C. Aheri.
-
05-Feb-2026
Statement U/sec.313 Cr.P.C.
Civil Judge Jr.Dn. J.M.F.C. Aheri.
-
24-Dec-2025
Evidence Part Heard
Civil Judge Jr.Dn. J.M.F.C. Aheri.
-
08-Oct-2025
Evidence Part Heard
Civil Judge Jr.Dn. J.M.F.C. Aheri.
-
09-Sep-2025
Evidence Part Heard
Civil Judge Jr.Dn. J.M.F.C. Aheri.
-
22-Jul-2025
Evidence Part Heard
Civil Judge Jr.Dn. J.M.F.C. Aheri.
-
17-Jun-2025
Evidence Part Heard
Civil Judge Jr.Dn. J.M.F.C. Aheri.
-
15-May-2025
Evidence Part Heard
Civil Judge Jr.Dn. J.M.F.C. Aheri.
-
01-Apr-2025
Evidence Part Heard
Civil Judge Jr.Dn. J.M.F.C. Aheri.
-
15-Jan-2025
Evidence Part Heard
Civil Judge Jr.Dn. J.M.F.C. Aheri.
-
26-Nov-2024
Evidence Part Heard
Civil Judge Jr.Dn. J.M.F.C. Aheri.
-
01-Oct-2024
Evidence Part Heard
Civil Judge Jr.Dn. J.M.F.C. Aheri.
-
14-Aug-2024
Evidence Part Heard
Civil Judge Jr.Dn. J.M.F.C. Aheri.
-
03-Jul-2024
Evidence Part Heard
Civil Judge Jr.Dn. J.M.F.C. Aheri.
-
28-May-2024
Evidence
Civil Judge Jr.Dn. J.M.F.C. Aheri.
-
03-Apr-2024
Evidence
Civil Judge Jr.Dn. J.M.F.C. Aheri.
-
15-Feb-2024
Evidence
Civil Judge Jr.Dn. J.M.F.C. Aheri.
-
30-Dec-2023
Evidence
Civil Judge Jr.Dn. J.M.F.C. Aheri.
-
20-Nov-2023
Evidence
Civil Judge Jr.Dn. J.M.F.C. Aheri.
-
27-Sep-2023
Evidence
Civil Judge Jr.Dn. J.M.F.C. Aheri.
-
03-Aug-2023
Evidence
Civil Judge Jr.Dn. J.M.F.C. Aheri.
-
19-Jun-2023
Evidence
Civil Judge Jr.Dn. J.M.F.C. Aheri.
-
17-Apr-2023
Evidence
Civil Judge Jr.Dn. J.M.F.C. Aheri.
-
27-Feb-2023
Evidence
Civil Judge Jr.Dn. J.M.F.C. Aheri.
-
23-Jan-2023
Evidence
Civil Judge Jr.Dn. J.M.F.C. Aheri.
-
13-Dec-2022
Evidence
Civil Judge Jr.Dn. J.M.F.C. Aheri.
-
20-Oct-2022
Evidence
Civil Judge Jr.Dn. J.M.F.C. Aheri.
-
25-Aug-2022
Awaiting Summons
Civil Judge Jr.Dn. J.M.F.C. Aheri.
-
16-Jun-2022
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
16-Jun-2022
Case filed
Registration No. 248/2022
Summary of Case 248/2022 The First Class Judicial Magistrate at Aheri acquitted accused Sandip Manohar Madavi of charges under the Maharashtra Prohibition Act, 1949 (Section 65E), finding that the prosecution failed to establish its case beyond reasonable doubt. Although 30 liters of illicit liquor was allegedly seized from the accused's residence on 22.02.2022, the court noted critical evidentiary gaps: the investigating officer's testimony was not recorded, independent witnesses were not examined, and chemical analysis reports alone were insufficient to prove the recovered liquid was country liquor. The court held that without corroborating testimony and substantive evidence, the prosecution could not discharge its burden of proof, warranting the accused's acquittal under CrPC Section 255(1). This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts