State of Maharashtra vs Sudhakar S/o Ganpati Mundhe . — 46/2026

Case under Maharashtra Prohibition Act Section 65(A)(E). Disposed: Uncontested--U/SEC. 258 OF CR.PC on 13th March 2026.

Case disposed

S.C.C. - Summons/Summary Criminal Case

CNR: MHLA060001662026

Filing Number

85/2026

Filing Date

21-Jan-2026

Registration No

46/2026

Registration Date

21-Jan-2026

Court

Civil Court Junior Division , Ahmedpur

Judge

2-2nd Jt. Cjjd And JMFC Ahmedpur

Decision Date

13-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--U/SEC. 258 OF CR.PC

Last updated 03-Jun-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

261

Police Station

Ahmdepur Police Station

Year

2021

Acts & Sections

Maharashtra Prohibition Act Section 65(A)(E)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.State of Maharashtra

    Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Sudhakar S/o Ganpati Mundhe .

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 13-Mar-2026

    Order on ExhibitView PDF

    Case Summary: State of Maharashtra v. Sudhakar (46/2026) The court discharged the accused Sudhakar under Section 258 CrPC (Section 281 BNSS) for alleged offences under the Maharashtra Prohibition Act, 1949. The court found critical evidentiary gaps: the investigating officer failed to file the chemical analysis report, omitted the receiver and carrier of seized liquor from witness lists, and broke the chain of custody. Without proof that the seized material was properly sealed and forwarded for analysis, the offence could not be proven beyond doubt. The four-year-old case was disposed to reduce criminal case pendency. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 13-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    2nd Jt. Cjjd And JMFC Ahmedpur

  4. 16-Feb-2026

    Hearing

    2nd Jt. Cjjd And JMFC Ahmedpur

  5. 27-Jan-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 21-Jan-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 46/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: State of Maharashtra v. Sudhakar (46/2026) The court discharged the accused Sudhakar under Section 258 CrPC (Section 281 BNSS) for alleged offences under the Maharashtra Prohibition Act, 1949. The court found critical evidentiary gaps: the investigating officer failed to file the chemical analysis report, omitted the receiver and carrier of seized liquor from witness lists, and broke the chain of custody. Without proof that the seized material was properly sealed and forwarded for analysis, the offence could not be proven beyond doubt. The four-year-old case was disposed to reduce criminal case pendency. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case