State of Maharashtra vs Chaya Sukhadev Thorat — 40/2026
Case under Child Marriage Restraint Act Section 9,10,11. Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 23rd April 2026.
Sessions Case
CNR: MHKO010010212026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
452/2026
Filing Date
10-03-2026
Registration No
40/2026
Registration Date
10-03-2026
Court
District and Sessions Court , Kolhapur
Judge
30-District Judge-4, Kolhapur
Decision Date
23rd April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ACQUITTED
FIR Details
FIR Number
99
Police Station
Police Station Kodoli
Year
2022
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State of Maharashtra
Adv. A. P. P.
Respondent(s)
Chaya Sukhadev Thorat
Aniket Sanjay Kambale
Sunita Sanjay Kambale
Arjun Vilas Thorat
Shankar Nana Thorat
vilas Ramchnadra Thorat
Sandeep Nana Thorat
Mahadev Babu Thorat
Sanjay Vishnu Kambale
Prakash Balu Gaikwad
Mohan Maruti Kambale
Milind Sadashiv Kambale
Rajendra Sudhir Kamable
Hearing History
Judge: 30-District Judge-4, Kolhapur
Disposed
Statement U/sec.313 Cr.P.C.
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 23-04-2026 | Disposed | |
| 21-04-2026 | Statement U/sec.313 Cr.P.C. | |
| 13-04-2026 | Evidence Part Heard | |
| 09-04-2026 | Evidence Part Heard | |
| 04-04-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The Fast Track Special Court in Kolhapur acquitted all 13 accused of charges under IPC Section 376 (rape), POCSO Act Sections 4, 6, 8, 12 (sexual offenses against minors), and the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act 2006, finding that the prosecution failed to prove the allegations of child marriage and sexual assault. The court relied primarily on the victim's testimony, which contradicted the prosecution case, and found insufficient corroborating evidence despite serious charges that required stringent proof. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The Fast Track Special Court in Kolhapur acquitted all 13 accused of charges under IPC Section 376 (rape), POCSO Act Sections 4, 6, 8, 12 (sexual offenses against minors), and the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act 2006, finding that the prosecution failed to prove the allegations of child marriage and sexual assault. The court relied primarily on the victim's testimony, which contradicted the prosecution case, and found insufficient corroborating evidence despite serious charges that required stringent proof. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts