State of Maharashtra through PSO Gondia City vs VijayKumar Motulal Chugwani(O.S.) Advocate - Tolani P. T. — 128/2021
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 188,272,273,328. Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 29th April 2026.
Sessions Case
CNR: MHGO010012072021
Filing Number
698/2021
Filing Date
28-10-2021
Registration No
128/2021
Registration Date
29-10-2021
Court
District and Session Court , Gondia
Judge
40-District Judge-4 and Additional Sessions Judge Gondia
Decision Date
29th April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ACQUITTED
FIR Details
FIR Number
787
Police Station
Gondiya City
Year
2020
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State of Maharashtra through PSO Gondia City
Adv. Chandwani M. S.
Respondent(s)
VijayKumar Motulal Chugwani(O.S.) Advocate - Tolani P. T.
Hearing History
Judge: 40-District Judge-4 and Additional Sessions Judge Gondia
Disposed
Statement U/sec.313 Cr.P.C.
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 29-04-2026 | Disposed |
| 28-04-2026 | Statement U/sec.313 Cr.P.C. |
| 27-04-2026 | Evidence |
| 23-04-2026 | Evidence |
| 18-04-2026 | Evidence |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The Sessions Court in Gondia acquitted Vijaykumar Chungwani of charges under IPC Sections 328, 273, and 188, and Food Safety Act provisions. The court found the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused administered prohibited chewing tobacco to anyone or caused consumption thereof. Key reasons included: the panch witness did not support the seizure, proper sampling procedures were not followed, no evidence of actual administration or sale was presented, and the accused's possession of the warehouse was not established. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The Sessions Court in Gondia acquitted Vijaykumar Chungwani of charges under IPC Sections 328, 273, and 188, and Food Safety Act provisions. The court found the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused administered prohibited chewing tobacco to anyone or caused consumption thereof. Key reasons included: the panch witness did not support the seizure, proper sampling procedures were not followed, no evidence of actual administration or sale was presented, and the accused's possession of the warehouse was not established. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts