State of Maharashtra Through Jaysingpur Police Station vs Dipali Sunil Bhanuse — 185/2025

Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 118(1),3(5). Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 25th May 2026.

Case disposed

R.C.C. - Regular Criminal Case

CNR: MHKO070020392025

e-Filing Number

22-08-2025

Filing Number

1288/2025

Filing Date

22-Aug-2025

Registration No

185/2025

Registration Date

22-Aug-2025

Court

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

Judge

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

Decision Date

25-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ACQUITTED

Last updated 15-Jun-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

494

Police Station

Police Station Jaysingpur

Year

2024

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 118(1),3(5)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.State of Maharashtra Through Jaysingpur Police Station

    Adv. A. P. P.

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Dipali Sunil Bhanuse

  2. 2.Sudarshan Sunil Bhanuse

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 25-May-2026

    Copy of JudgmentView PDF

  3. 25-May-2026

    Copy of JudgmentView PDF

    Case 185/2025 Summary Court Decision: The First Class Judicial Magistrate acquitted accused Dipali Sunil Bhanuse of charges under Indian Penal Code 2023, sections 118(1) and 3(5), due to insufficient prosecution evidence. The court found that the prosecution failed to establish the alleged incident of December 24, 2024, where the accused allegedly struck the complainant with a wooden stick, causing injury. Key Reasoning: The two prosecution witnesses (a panchnama witness and the complainant) failed to corroborate the allegations in their testimonies. Neither witness confirmed details of the alleged assault, and the complainant declined to provide additional evidence despite opportunity. The court held that the prosecution must prove charges beyond reasonable doubt through concrete evidence, and absent such proof, the accused deserves the benefit of doubt under law. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  4. 25-May-2026

    Disposed

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

  5. 08-May-2026

    Arguments

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

  6. 07-May-2026

    Arguments

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

  7. 28-Apr-2026

    Arguments

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

  8. 08-Apr-2026

    Arguments

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

  9. 04-Apr-2026

    Evidence Part Heard

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

  10. 02-Apr-2026

    Evidence Part Heard

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

  11. 16-Mar-2026

    Evidence Part Heard

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

  12. 24-Feb-2026

    Evidence Part Heard

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

  13. 30-Jan-2026

    Evidence Part Heard

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

  14. 21-Jan-2026

    Evidence Part Heard

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

  15. 23-Dec-2025

    Evidence Part Heard

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

  16. 19-Nov-2025

    Evidence Part Heard

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

  17. 18-Nov-2025

    Evidence Part Heard

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

  18. 03-Nov-2025

    Filing of Surety

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

  19. 13-Oct-2025

    Filing of Surety

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

  20. 30-Aug-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  21. 22-Aug-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. 185/2025

casestatus.in Summary

Case 185/2025 Summary Court Decision: The First Class Judicial Magistrate acquitted accused Dipali Sunil Bhanuse of charges under Indian Penal Code 2023, sections 118(1) and 3(5), due to insufficient prosecution evidence. The court found that the prosecution failed to establish the alleged incident of December 24, 2024, where the accused allegedly struck the complainant with a wooden stick, causing injury. Key Reasoning: The two prosecution witnesses (a panchnama witness and the complainant) failed to corroborate the allegations in their testimonies. Neither witness confirmed details of the alleged assault, and the complainant declined to provide additional evidence despite opportunity. The court held that the prosecution must prove charges beyond reasonable doubt through concrete evidence, and absent such proof, the accused deserves the benefit of doubt under law. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case