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

Case disposed

Filing Number

1649/2024

Filing Date

23-12-2024

Registration No

1303/2024

Registration Date

23-12-2024

Court

Civil Court Junior Division , Tirora

Judge

2-Jt.Civil JudgeJr. Dn. JMFC. Tirora

Decision Date

13th April 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ACQUITTED

FIR Details

FIR Number

684

Police Station

Police Station Officer Tirora

Year

2024

Acts & Sections

MAHARASHTRA PROHIBITION ACT Section 65(e)

Petitioner(s)

State of Maharashtra Through PSO Tirora

Adv. Borikar M.K.

Respondent(s)

Vijay Damaji Uke

Hearing History

Judge: 2-Jt.Civil JudgeJr. Dn. JMFC. Tirora

13-04-2026

Disposed

11-03-2026

Arguments

30-12-2025

Evidence

29-10-2025

Evidence

14-08-2025

Evidence

Final Orders / Judgements

13-04-2026
Copy of Judgment

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.

casestatus.in Summary

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.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

Civil Court Junior Division , Tirora All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case