State of Maharashtra vs Govind s/o Sandipan Undre and othr 2 Advocate - Kamble Rahul D — 34/2025
Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 223,274,275,123. Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 20th May 2026.
Sessions Case
CNR: MHLA040004362025
Filing Number
247/2025
Filing Date
03-11-2025
Registration No
34/2025
Registration Date
03-11-2025
Court
Additional District Court, Ahmedpur
Judge
1-District Judge 1
Decision Date
20th May 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ACQUITTED
FIR Details
FIR Number
108
Police Station
Kingaon
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State of Maharashtra
Adv. Patil Mahesh K_DGP11
Respondent(s)
Govind s/o Sandipan Undre and othr 2 Advocate - Kamble Rahul D
Jabaj s/o Maheboob Shaikh
Adv. Kamble Rahul D
Santosh s/o Vishwnath Phad
Adv. Kamble Rahul D
Hearing History
Judge: 1-District Judge 1
Disposed
Arguments
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence
Evidence
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 20-05-2026 | Disposed |
| 24-04-2026 | Arguments |
| 08-04-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
| 13-03-2026 | Evidence |
| 17-02-2026 | Evidence |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: Sessions Case 34/2025 Court Decision: The Additional Sessions Judge acquitted all three accused—Govind Sandipan Udare, Jabaj Maheboob Shaikh, and Santosh Vishwanath Phad—of charges under Sections 123 and 275 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (contraband gutkha/tobacco possession for sale). The prosecution failed to provide forensic laboratory reports proving the seized items were unsafe for consumption and failed to comply with mandatory sample collection procedures under the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006, including obtaining accused signatures and proper sample division. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: Sessions Case 34/2025 Court Decision: The Additional Sessions Judge acquitted all three accused—Govind Sandipan Udare, Jabaj Maheboob Shaikh, and Santosh Vishwanath Phad—of charges under Sections 123 and 275 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (contraband gutkha/tobacco possession for sale). The prosecution failed to provide forensic laboratory reports proving the seized items were unsafe for consumption and failed to comply with mandatory sample collection procedures under the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006, including obtaining accused signatures and proper sample division. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts