State of Maharashtra Through PSO Salekasa vs Premlal Chandan Dhamde other-1 Advocate - Lilhare R.D. — 57/2020
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 324,504,506,34. Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 05th May 2026.
R.C.C. - Regular Criminal Case
CNR: MHGO040005512020
Filing Number
483/2020
Filing Date
19-06-2020
Registration No
57/2020
Registration Date
19-06-2020
Court
Civil Court Junior Division , Amgaon
Judge
2-JtCivil Judge, Junior Division, & J.M.F.C., Amgaon
Decision Date
05th May 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ACQUITTED
FIR Details
FIR Number
55
Police Station
Salekasa
Year
2020
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State of Maharashtra Through PSO Salekasa
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
Premlal Chandan Dhamde other-1 Advocate - Lilhare R.D.
Kamlesh Nokhram Lilhare
Adv. Lilhare R.D.
Hearing History
Judge: 2-JtCivil Judge, Junior Division, & J.M.F.C., Amgaon
Disposed
Arguments
Arguments
Arguments
Arguments
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 05-05-2026 | Disposed |
| 08-04-2026 | Arguments |
| 11-03-2026 | Arguments |
| 18-02-2026 | Arguments |
| 10-02-2026 | Arguments |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The court acquitted both accused (Premlal Chandanwamde and Kamlesh Nokhram Lilhare) of charges under IPC sections 324, 504, and 506 (causing hurt, criminal intimidation, and abusive language) on May 5, 2026. The judge found that the prosecution failed to prove the allegations beyond reasonable doubt, noting critical evidentiary gaps—particularly that witnesses did not adequately support the case and a settlement (compromise) between the accused and complainant was documented, making acquittal appropriate under CrPC section 248(1). This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The court acquitted both accused (Premlal Chandanwamde and Kamlesh Nokhram Lilhare) of charges under IPC sections 324, 504, and 506 (causing hurt, criminal intimidation, and abusive language) on May 5, 2026. The judge found that the prosecution failed to prove the allegations beyond reasonable doubt, noting critical evidentiary gaps—particularly that witnesses did not adequately support the case and a settlement (compromise) between the accused and complainant was documented, making acquittal appropriate under CrPC section 248(1). This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts