State of Maharashtra Through PSO Amgaon vs Rajaram Tularam Khobragade Advocate - Amol P. Borkar — 950/2024
Case under Maharashtra Prohibition Act Section 65(e),77(a). Status: Statement U/sec.313 Cr.P.C.. Next hearing: 16th July 2026.
S.C.C. - Summons/Summary Criminal Case
CNR: MHGO040016512024
Next Hearing
16th July 2026
Filing Number
1397/2024
Filing Date
17-12-2024
Registration No
950/2024
Registration Date
17-12-2024
Court
Civil Court Junior Division , Amgaon
Judge
1-Civil Judge, Junior Division, & J.M.F.C., Amgaon
FIR Details
FIR Number
569
Police Station
Amgaon
Year
2024
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State of Maharashtra Through PSO Amgaon
Adv. App
Respondent(s)
Rajaram Tularam Khobragade Advocate - Amol P. Borkar
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Civil Judge, Junior Division, & J.M.F.C., Amgaon
Statement U/sec.313 Cr.P.C.
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 12-05-2026 | Statement U/sec.313 Cr.P.C. |
| 11-03-2026 | Evidence |
| 17-01-2026 | Evidence |
| 12-11-2025 | Evidence |
| 22-09-2025 | Evidence |
Interim Orders
Case Summary Case No: S.F.Kh.Kra. 950/2024 (State vs. Rajaram) Court: First Class Magistrate, Amgaon Date: 12/11/2025 The court recorded the examination-in-chief and cross-examination of two government witnesses in an alleged liquor seizure case dated 13/11/2024. Both witnesses testified that they were called for panchnama (official record) and signed the seizure documents, though they claimed not to understand the contents. The court accepted the witness statements and dismissed the cross-examination by the defense counsel. No substantive order on bail, conviction, or case dismissal was passed in this interim hearing. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary Case No: S.F.Kh.Kra. 950/2024 (State vs. Rajaram) Court: First Class Magistrate, Amgaon Date: 12/11/2025 The court recorded the examination-in-chief and cross-examination of two government witnesses in an alleged liquor seizure case dated 13/11/2024. Both witnesses testified that they were called for panchnama (official record) and signed the seizure documents, though they claimed not to understand the contents. The court accepted the witness statements and dismissed the cross-examination by the defense counsel. No substantive order on bail, conviction, or case dismissal was passed in this interim hearing. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts