State of Maharashtra vs Avinash Dattatraya Gomsale — 387/2025

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

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

CNR: MHLA120012022025

Case disposed

Filing Number

684/2025

Filing Date

23-04-2025

Registration No

387/2025

Registration Date

24-04-2025

Court

Civil Court Junior Division , Nilanga

Judge

2-2nd Jt. CJJD JMFC Nilanga

Decision Date

13th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

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

FIR Details

FIR Number

58

Police Station

Excise Department, Latur

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

MAHARASHTRA PROHIBITION ACT Section 65(a)(e)

Petitioner(s)

State of Maharashtra

Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

Avinash Dattatraya Gomsale

Hearing History

Judge: 2-2nd Jt. CJJD JMFC Nilanga

13-03-2026

Disposed

24-02-2026

Appearance

25-11-2025

Appearance

28-08-2025

Appearance

08-05-2025

Appearance

Final Orders / Judgements

13-03-2026
Order on Exhibit

Case Summary: State of Maharashtra v. Avinash Dattatraya Gomsale (387/2025) The court discharged accused Avinash Dattatraya Gomsale from charges under Section 65(a)(e) of the Bombay Prohibition Act, invoking Section 281 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Surakhsa Sanhita, 2023. The discharge was ordered because the accused could not be traced despite multiple summons, the chargesheet analysis report was not received, and further delay served no purpose. The accused's bail bonds were cancelled and seized materials disposed of per rules. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: State of Maharashtra v. Avinash Dattatraya Gomsale (387/2025) The court discharged accused Avinash Dattatraya Gomsale from charges under Section 65(a)(e) of the Bombay Prohibition Act, invoking Section 281 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Surakhsa Sanhita, 2023. The discharge was ordered because the accused could not be traced despite multiple summons, the chargesheet analysis report was not received, and further delay served no purpose. The accused's bail bonds were cancelled and seized materials disposed of per rules. 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 Court Junior Division , Nilanga All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case