State Of Maharashtra vs Vinayak Dilip Powar — 54/2023
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 379,. Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 10th March 2026.
R.C.C. - Regular Criminal Case
CNR: MHKO110005112023
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
378/2023
Filing Date
21-03-2023
Registration No
54/2023
Registration Date
24-03-2023
Court
Civil and Criminal Court, Peth Vadgaon
Judge
4-3rd Jt. CJJD and JMFC PethVadgaon
Decision Date
10th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ACQUITTED
FIR Details
FIR Number
23
Police Station
Police Station Peth-Vadgaon.
Year
2022
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State Of Maharashtra
Adv. Governemnt Pleader
Respondent(s)
Vinayak Dilip Powar
Hearing History
Judge: 4-3rd Jt. CJJD and JMFC PethVadgaon
Disposed
Arguments
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 10-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 24-02-2026 | Arguments | |
| 28-01-2026 | Evidence Part Heard | |
| 12-01-2026 | Evidence Part Heard | |
| 17-11-2025 | Evidence Part Heard |
Final Orders / Judgements
Court Decision Summary The First Class Judicial Magistrate Court in Peth-Wadvgaon acquitted accused Dilip Powar of theft charges under IPC Section 379, finding insufficient evidence despite the complainant's allegations that the accused stole a Samsung Galaxy A32 mobile phone on January 10, 2022. The court noted that the complainant (sole witness) later reconciled with the accused outside court and failed to provide credible testimony linking the defendant to the alleged theft, leading to reasonable doubt in the prosecution's case. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Court Decision Summary The First Class Judicial Magistrate Court in Peth-Wadvgaon acquitted accused Dilip Powar of theft charges under IPC Section 379, finding insufficient evidence despite the complainant's allegations that the accused stole a Samsung Galaxy A32 mobile phone on January 10, 2022. The court noted that the complainant (sole witness) later reconciled with the accused outside court and failed to provide credible testimony linking the defendant to the alleged theft, leading to reasonable doubt in the prosecution's case. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts