The State of Maharashtra vs Shri. Krishna Aba Jadhav Advocate - S. P. Wagvekar — 1600067/2014

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 452,337,324,323,504,506,34. Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 30th March 2026.

R.C.C. - Regular Criminal Case

CNR: MHKO190004122014

Case disposed

Filing Number

1600265/2014

Filing Date

02-09-2014

Registration No

1600067/2014

Registration Date

02-09-2014

Court

Civil and Criminal Court , Radhanagari

Judge

1-CJJD and JMFC Radhanagari

Decision Date

30th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ACQUITTED

FIR Details

FIR Number

57

Police Station

Radhanagari Polilce Station

Year

2014

Acts & Sections

INDIAN PENAL CODE Section 452,337,324,323,504,506,34

Petitioner(s)

The State of Maharashtra

Adv. A. P. P.

Respondent(s)

Shri. Krishna Aba Jadhav Advocate - S. P. Wagvekar

Shri. Dattatrya Krishna Jadhav

Adv. Sandeep Pandurang Wagavekar

Sou. Gourabai Krishna Jadhav

Adv. Sandeep Pandurang Wagavekar

Shrimati Sajabai alies Bharati Rajendra Magdum

Adv. Sandeep Pandurang Wagavekar

Hearing History

Judge: 1-CJJD and JMFC Radhanagari

30-03-2026

Disposed

25-03-2026

Arguments

16-03-2026

Arguments

07-03-2026

Arguments

02-03-2026

Arguments

Final Orders / Judgements

30-03-2026
Copy of Judgment

Summary of Case 1600067/2014 The court acquitted all three accused (Krushna Aba Jadhav, Dattatraya Krushna Jadhav, and Sajabai Rajendra Magdum) of charges under IPC sections 452, 337, 324, 323, 504, and 506 due to inconsistencies and material improvements in prosecution witness testimony, lack of corroboration from medical and seizure evidence, and the existence of a civil land dispute between parties that motivated potential false implication. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Interim Orders

07-11-2016
Charge
casestatus.in Summary

Summary of Case 1600067/2014 The court acquitted all three accused (Krushna Aba Jadhav, Dattatraya Krushna Jadhav, and Sajabai Rajendra Magdum) of charges under IPC sections 452, 337, 324, 323, 504, and 506 due to inconsistencies and material improvements in prosecution witness testimony, lack of corroboration from medical and seizure evidence, and the existence of a civil land dispute between parties that motivated potential false implication. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

Civil and Criminal Court , Radhanagari All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case