State of Maharashtra Through PSO Tirora vs Vijay Damaji Uke — 1303/2024
Case under Maharashtra Prohibition Act Section 65(e). Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 13th April 2026.
S.C.C. - Summons/Summary Criminal Case
CNR: MHGO080017812024
Filing Number
1649/2024
Filing Date
23-Dec-2024
Registration No
1303/2024
Registration Date
23-Dec-2024
Court
Civil Court Junior Division , Tirora
Judge
2-Jt.Civil JudgeJr. Dn. JMFC. Tirora
Decision Date
13-Apr-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ACQUITTED
Last updated 21-May-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
684
Police Station
Police Station Officer Tirora
Year
2024
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.State of Maharashtra Through PSO Tirora
Adv. Borikar M.K.
Respondent(s)
-
1.Vijay Damaji Uke
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
13-Apr-2026
Copy of JudgmentView PDF
Summary The court acquitted the accused under Maharashtra Excise Act, Section 65(E) and Section 77(A), finding that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. The accused was charged with possessing 10 liters of illicit liquor valued at ₹1,000, but the court determined that the independent panchanama witness testimony was unreliable and the prosecution had not adequately established the guilt. Consequently, the accused was granted bail and discharged under CrPC Section 255(1). This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
13-Apr-2026
Disposed
Jt.Civil JudgeJr. Dn. JMFC. Tirora
-
11-Mar-2026
Arguments
Jt.Civil JudgeJr. Dn. JMFC. Tirora
-
30-Dec-2025
Evidence
Jt.Civil JudgeJr. Dn. JMFC. Tirora
-
29-Oct-2025
Evidence
Jt.Civil JudgeJr. Dn. JMFC. Tirora
-
14-Aug-2025
Evidence
Jt.Civil JudgeJr. Dn. JMFC. Tirora
-
10-Jul-2025
Evidence
Jt.Civil JudgeJr. Dn. JMFC. Tirora
-
16-May-2025
Evidence
Civil Judge Junior Division Tirora
-
29-Mar-2025
Evidence
Jt.Civil JudgeJr. Dn. JMFC. Tirora
-
27-Feb-2025
Evidence
Jt.Civil JudgeJr. Dn. JMFC. Tirora
-
23-Dec-2024
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
23-Dec-2024
Case filed
Registration No. 1303/2024
Summary The court acquitted the accused under Maharashtra Excise Act, Section 65(E) and Section 77(A), finding that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. The accused was charged with possessing 10 liters of illicit liquor valued at ₹1,000, but the court determined that the independent panchanama witness testimony was unreliable and the prosecution had not adequately established the guilt. Consequently, the accused was granted bail and discharged under CrPC Section 255(1). This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts