State of Maharashtra Through PSO Salekasa vs Ravindra kanhaiyyalal Yede — 670/2025
Case under Maharashtra Prohibition Act Section 65(e),77(a). Disposed: Uncontested--U/SEC. 258 OF CR.PC on 11th March 2026.
S.C.C. - Summons/Summary Criminal Case
CNR: MHGO040011522025
Filing Number
1041/2025
Filing Date
27-Jun-2025
Registration No
670/2025
Registration Date
27-Jun-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
164
Police Station
Salekasa
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.State of Maharashtra Through PSO Salekasa
Adv. Rangari P.K.
Respondent(s)
-
1.Ravindra kanhaiyyalal Yede
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
11-Mar-2026
Order on Exhibit
Summary The court stopped proceedings against accused Ravindra Kanhaiyalal Yede under Section 281 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, and discharged him from charges under the Maharashtra Prohibition Act (Sections 65(e) & 77(a)). The discharge was ordered due to the prosecution's failure to secure the accused's presence, non-filing of the Charge Sheet report despite six months elapsing, making trial proceedings impossible, though the prosecution retains liberty to revive proceedings with 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
-
15-Jan-2026
Awaiting Summons
JtCivil Judge, Junior Division, & J.m.f.c., Amgaon
-
25-Sep-2025
Awaiting Summons
JtCivil Judge, Junior Division, & J.m.f.c., Amgaon
-
27-Jun-2025
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
27-Jun-2025
Case filed
Registration No. 670/2025
Summary The court stopped proceedings against accused Ravindra Kanhaiyalal Yede under Section 281 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, and discharged him from charges under the Maharashtra Prohibition Act (Sections 65(e) & 77(a)). The discharge was ordered due to the prosecution's failure to secure the accused's presence, non-filing of the Charge Sheet report despite six months elapsing, making trial proceedings impossible, though the prosecution retains liberty to revive proceedings with justifiable grounds. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts