State of Maharashtra vs Jaywant Nivrutti Patil Advocate - N. B. Mane — 22/2023
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 324,323,504,506. Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 11th May 2026.
R.C.C. - Regular Criminal Case
CNR: MHKO200001452023
Filing Number
109/2023
Filing Date
11-04-2023
Registration No
22/2023
Registration Date
11-04-2023
Court
CJJD and JMFC, Kale-Kheriwade
Judge
1-CJJD and JMFC Kale-Kherivade
Decision Date
11th May 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ACQUITTED
FIR Details
FIR Number
123
Police Station
Panhala Police Station
Year
2022
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State of Maharashtra
Adv. A.P.P.
Respondent(s)
Jaywant Nivrutti Patil Advocate - N. B. Mane
Hearing History
Judge: 1-CJJD and JMFC Kale-Kherivade
Disposed
Arguments
Arguments
Statement U/sec.313 Cr.P.C.
Evidence Part Heard
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 11-05-2026 | Disposed |
| 28-04-2026 | Arguments |
| 01-04-2026 | Arguments |
| 27-03-2026 | Statement U/sec.313 Cr.P.C. |
| 16-03-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: State of Maharashtra v. Jaywant Nivrutti Patil Court Decision: The defendant Jaywant Nivrutti Patil was acquitted of all charges under IPC sections 323, 324, 504, and 506. The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the allegations of voluntarily causing hurt with a wooden spade during a land dispute with the complainant. Key Reasoning: Although the complainant and three witnesses testified about an alleged assault over a shared agricultural boundary dispute, the court determined the prosecution's evidence was insufficient. Inconsistencies in witness accounts and lack of corroborating physical evidence undermined the charges, leading to the defendant's acquittal under CrPC section 248(1). This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
Case Summary: State of Maharashtra v. Jaywant Nivrutti Patil Court Decision: The defendant Jaywant Nivrutti Patil was acquitted of all charges under IPC sections 323, 324, 504, and 506. The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the allegations of voluntarily causing hurt with a wooden spade during a land dispute with the complainant. Key Reasoning: Although the complainant and three witnesses testified about an alleged assault over a shared agricultural boundary dispute, the court determined the prosecution's evidence was insufficient. Inconsistencies in witness accounts and lack of corroborating physical evidence undermined the charges, leading to the defendant's acquittal under CrPC section 248(1). This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts