State of Maharashtra Through Jaysingpur Police Station vs Amol Ajit Kognole — 275/2026

Case under Maharashtra Prohibition Act Section 75A. Disposed: Uncontested--CONVICTED ON PLEAD GUILTY / PLEA BARGAINING on 10th March 2026.

Case disposed

S.C.C. - Summons/Summary Criminal Case

CNR: MHKO070006102026

e-Filing Number

10-03-2026

Filing Number

464/2026

Filing Date

10-Mar-2026

Registration No

275/2026

Registration Date

10-Mar-2026

Court

Civil Court Sr.Dn. and Jr.Dn. Jaysingpur

Judge

13-Joint C.J.J.D. and J.M.F.C. Jaysingpur

Decision Date

10-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--CONVICTED ON PLEAD GUILTY / PLEA BARGAINING

Last updated 10-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

473

Police Station

Police Station Jaysingpur

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

Maharashtra Prohibition Act Section 75A

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.State of Maharashtra Through Jaysingpur Police Station

    Adv. A. P. P.

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Amol Ajit Kognole

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 10-Mar-2026

    Copy of JudgmentView PDF

    The Judicial Magistrate convicted Amol Ajit Kognole under Section 75(A) of the Maharashtra Prohibition Act for being found in a drunken state in a public place on 27/12/2025. The court accepted his voluntary guilty plea after verifying its voluntariness and sentenced him to simple imprisonment until rising of court plus a fine of Rs. 500 (with 2 days additional imprisonment in default), showing leniency considering he is the sole breadwinner for his family and not a habitual offender. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 10-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Joint C.J.J.D. and J.M.F.C. Jaysingpur

  4. 10-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 275/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The Judicial Magistrate convicted Amol Ajit Kognole under Section 75(A) of the Maharashtra Prohibition Act for being found in a drunken state in a public place on 27/12/2025. The court accepted his voluntary guilty plea after verifying its voluntariness and sentenced him to simple imprisonment until rising of court plus a fine of Rs. 500 (with 2 days additional imprisonment in default), showing leniency considering he is the sole breadwinner for his family and not a habitual offender. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case