State of Maharashtra Through PSO Salekasa vs Chainlal Maharuji Maraskolhe — 295/2025
Case under Maharashtra Prohibition Act Section 65e,66(1)b. Disposed: Uncontested--U/SEC. 258 OF CR.PC on 11th March 2026.
S.C.C. - Summons/Summary Criminal Case
CNR: MHGO040005782025
Filing Number
514/2025
Filing Date
02-Apr-2025
Registration No
295/2025
Registration Date
02-Apr-2025
Court
Civil Court Junior Division , Amgaon
Judge
2-JtCivil Judge, Junior Division, & J.m.f.c., Amgaon
Decision Date
11-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--U/SEC. 258 OF CR.PC
Last updated 21-May-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
44
Police Station
Salekasa
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.State of Maharashtra Through PSO Salekasa
Adv. App
Respondent(s)
-
1.Chainlal Maharuji Maraskolhe
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
11-Mar-2026
Order on ExhibitView PDF
Summary The court discharged accused Chainlal Maharuji Marashkolhe under Section 281 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in a Maharashtra Prohibition Act case (Sections 65(e) & 66(1)(b)). The discharge was ordered due to the prosecution's failure to secure the accused's presence, non-filing of the C.A report despite six months elapsing, making trial proceedings untenable. The prosecution retains liberty to revive proceedings upon showing justifiable grounds. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
11-Mar-2026
Disposed
JtCivil Judge, Junior Division, & J.m.f.c., Amgaon
-
11-Dec-2025
Awaiting Summons
JtCivil Judge, Junior Division, & J.m.f.c., Amgaon
-
11-Sep-2025
Awaiting Summons
JtCivil Judge, Junior Division, & J.m.f.c., Amgaon
-
19-Jun-2025
Awaiting Summons
JtCivil Judge, Junior Division, & J.m.f.c., Amgaon
-
02-Apr-2025
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
02-Apr-2025
Case filed
Registration No. 295/2025
Summary The court discharged accused Chainlal Maharuji Marashkolhe under Section 281 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in a Maharashtra Prohibition Act case (Sections 65(e) & 66(1)(b)). The discharge was ordered due to the prosecution's failure to secure the accused's presence, non-filing of the C.A report despite six months elapsing, making trial proceedings untenable. The prosecution retains liberty to revive proceedings upon showing justifiable grounds. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts