State of Maharashtra vs Balbhim Ganpati Tekale — 2280/2024

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

Case disposed

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

CNR: MHLA120030092024

Filing Number

2991/2024

Filing Date

11-Nov-2024

Registration No

2280/2024

Registration Date

12-Nov-2024

Court

Civil Court Junior Division , Nilanga

Judge

2-2nd Jt. Cjjd JMFC Nilanga

Decision Date

13-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

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

Last updated 04-Jun-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

8

Police Station

Excise Department, Latur

Year

2024

Acts & Sections

Maharashtra Prohibition Act Section 65e

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.State of Maharashtra

    Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Balbhim Ganpati Tekale

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 13-Mar-2026

    Order on ExhibitView PDF

    The court discharged accused Balbhim Ganpati Tekale under Section 258 of the CrPC in a Bombay Prohibition Act Section 65(e) case, as the accused could not be traced despite multiple summons and police efforts proved futile. The court found it unproductive to keep the case pending indefinitely without the Chargeability (CA) report and in the accused's absence, thus exercising discretionary power to stop proceedings and cancel bail bonds. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 13-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    2nd Jt. Cjjd JMFC Nilanga

  4. 19-Jan-2026

    Appearance

    2nd Jt. Cjjd JMFC Nilanga

  5. 29-Sep-2025

    Appearance

    2nd Jt. Cjjd JMFC Nilanga

  6. 11-Jul-2025

    Appearance

    2nd Jt. Cjjd JMFC Nilanga

  7. 12-Mar-2025

    Appearance

    2nd Jt. Cjjd JMFC Nilanga

  8. 26-Nov-2024

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  9. 11-Nov-2024

    Case filed

    Registration No. 2280/2024

casestatus.in Summary

The court discharged accused Balbhim Ganpati Tekale under Section 258 of the CrPC in a Bombay Prohibition Act Section 65(e) case, as the accused could not be traced despite multiple summons and police efforts proved futile. The court found it unproductive to keep the case pending indefinitely without the Chargeability (CA) report and in the accused's absence, thus exercising discretionary power to stop proceedings and cancel bail bonds. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case