The State of Maharashtra vs Balaji Bhagwan Pawar Advocate - KALE S N — 180/2023

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 143,146,149,353,506. Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 24th April 2026.

Case disposed

Sessions Case

CNR: MHJN010018032023

e-Filing Number

29-05-2023

Filing Number

963/2023

Filing Date

29-May-2023

Registration No

180/2023

Registration Date

29-May-2023

Court

District and Session Court , Jalna

Judge

30-Adhoc District Judge-1 Addl. Sessions Judge

Decision Date

24-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ACQUITTED

Last updated 14-Jun-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

462

Police Station

Taluka Jalna

Year

2021

Acts & Sections

Indian Penal Code Section 143,146,149,353,506

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.The State of Maharashtra

    Adv. SONAWANE A. B.

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Balaji Bhagwan Pawar Advocate - KALE S N

  2. 2.Somnath Laxman Jadhav

  3. 3.Tukaram Malhari Vitekar

  4. 4.Pradip Vidyadhar Waghmare

  5. 5.Shankar Baburao Pawar

  6. 6.Vishnu Vitthalrao Pawar

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 24-Apr-2026

    Copy of JudgmentView PDF

    Summary of Session Case 180/2023 Court Decision: The court acquitted all six accused (Balaji Bhagwan Pawar, Somnath Laxman Jadhav, Tukaram Malhari Vitekar, Pradip Vidyadhar Vagmare, Shankar Baburav Pawar, and Vishnu Vitthol Pawar) under IPC sections 353, 143, 146, 149, 506 and Mining Mineral Act sections 48/7 and 48/8. The prosecution failed to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt due to inconsistencies and gaps in witness testimony. Key Reasoning: The court found that prosecution witnesses had contradictory statements regarding the incident location, sequence of events, and identification of accused persons. Critical evidence like vehicles allegedly seized remained unaccounted for in the case record, and no solid documentary proof directly linked the accused to the alleged rioting, obstruction of government duty, or illegal mining activities on October 13, 2021. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 24-Apr-2026

    Disposed

    Adhoc District Judge-1 Addl. Sessions Judge

  4. 21-Apr-2026

    Judgment

    Adhoc District Judge-1 Addl. Sessions Judge

  5. 16-Apr-2026

    Judgment

    Adhoc District Judge-1 Addl. Sessions Judge

  6. 08-Apr-2026

    Arguments

    Adhoc District Judge-1 Addl. Sessions Judge

  7. 30-Mar-2026

    Arguments

    Adhoc District Judge-1 Addl. Sessions Judge

  8. 16-Mar-2026

    Arguments

    Adhoc District Judge-1 Addl. Sessions Judge

  9. 06-Mar-2026

    Statement U/sec.313 Cr.P.C.

    Adhoc District Judge-1 Addl. Sessions Judge

  10. 24-Feb-2026

    Statement U/sec.313 Cr.P.C.

    Adhoc District Judge-1 Addl. Sessions Judge

  11. 06-Feb-2026

    Evidence Part Heard

    Adhoc District Judge-1 Addl. Sessions Judge

  12. 20-Jan-2026

    Evidence Part Heard

    Adhoc District Judge-1 Addl. Sessions Judge

  13. 06-Jan-2026

    Evidence Part Heard

    Adhoc District Judge-1 Addl. Sessions Judge

  14. 19-Dec-2025

    Evidence Part Heard

    Adhoc District Judge-1 Addl. Sessions Judge

  15. 09-Dec-2025

    Evidence Part Heard

    Adhoc District Judge-1 Addl. Sessions Judge

  16. 17-Nov-2025

    Evidence

    Adhoc District Judge-1 Addl. Sessions Judge

  17. 04-Oct-2025

    Evidence

    District Judge-2 and Addl. Sessions Judge

  18. 04-Sep-2025

    Evidence

    District Judge-2 and Addl. Sessions Judge

  19. 01-Aug-2025

    Evidence

    District Judge-1 and Addl.Sessions Judge

  20. 22-Jul-2025

    Evidence

    District Judge-1 and Addl.Sessions Judge

  21. 20-May-2025

    Evidence

    District Judge-3 and Additional Sessions Judge

  22. 11-Mar-2025

    Evidence

    District Judge-3 and Additional Sessions Judge

  23. 24-Jan-2025

    Evidence

    District Judge-4 and Addl.Sessions Judge

  24. 13-Nov-2024

    Evidence

    District Judge-4 and Addl.Sessions Judge

  25. 19-Sep-2024

    Evidence

    District Judge-4 and Addl.Sessions Judge

  26. 08-Aug-2024

    Evidence

    District Judge-4 and Addl.Sessions Judge

  27. 14-Jun-2024

    Evidence

    District Judge-4 and Addl.Sessions Judge

  28. 03-May-2024

    Evidence

    District Judge-4 and Addl.Sessions Judge

  29. 19-Mar-2024

    Evidence

    District Judge-4 and Addl.Sessions Judge

  30. 14-Feb-2024

    Evidence

    District Judge-4 and Addl.Sessions Judge

  31. 04-Jan-2024

    Evidence

    District Judge-4 and Addl.Sessions Judge

  32. 23-Nov-2023

    Evidence

    District Judge-4 and Addl.Sessions Judge

  33. 18-Oct-2023

    Evidence

    District Judge-4 and Addl.Sessions Judge

  34. 20-Sep-2023

    Evidence

    District Judge-4 and Addl.Sessions Judge

  35. 08-Aug-2023

    Evidence

    District Judge-4 and Addl.Sessions Judge

  36. 31-Jul-2023

    Awaiting Muddemal

    District Judge-3 and Additional Sessions Judge

  37. 14-Jul-2023

    Awaiting Muddemal

    District Judge-3 and Additional Sessions Judge

  38. 06-Jul-2023

    Order on Exh

    District Judge-3 and Additional Sessions Judge

  39. 09-Jun-2023

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  40. 29-May-2023

    Case filed

    Registration No. 180/2023

casestatus.in Summary

Summary of Session Case 180/2023 Court Decision: The court acquitted all six accused (Balaji Bhagwan Pawar, Somnath Laxman Jadhav, Tukaram Malhari Vitekar, Pradip Vidyadhar Vagmare, Shankar Baburav Pawar, and Vishnu Vitthol Pawar) under IPC sections 353, 143, 146, 149, 506 and Mining Mineral Act sections 48/7 and 48/8. The prosecution failed to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt due to inconsistencies and gaps in witness testimony. Key Reasoning: The court found that prosecution witnesses had contradictory statements regarding the incident location, sequence of events, and identification of accused persons. Critical evidence like vehicles allegedly seized remained unaccounted for in the case record, and no solid documentary proof directly linked the accused to the alleged rioting, obstruction of government duty, or illegal mining activities on October 13, 2021. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case