State of Maharashtra vs Ramesh Laxman Shinde — 2809/2024

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

Case disposed

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

CNR: MHLA120032912024

Filing Number

3291/2024

Filing Date

12-Dec-2024

Registration No

2809/2024

Registration Date

12-Dec-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

273

Police Station

Aurad Shahajani

Year

2024

Acts & Sections

Maharashtra Prohibition Act Section 65(e)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.State of Maharashtra

    Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Ramesh Laxman Shinde

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 13-Mar-2026

    Order on ExhibitView PDF

    The court discharged accused Ramesh Laxman Shinde from charges under Section 65(e) of the Bombay Prohibition Act, invoking Section 258 of the CrPC, as the accused could not be traced despite multiple summons and no Chargeability (CA) report was received. The court found it futile to keep the case pending and cancelled his bail bonds; seized materials were ordered disposed as per rules. 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. 15-Dec-2025

    Appearance

    2nd Jt. Cjjd JMFC Nilanga

  5. 05-Nov-2025

    Appearance

    2nd Jt. Cjjd JMFC Nilanga

  6. 25-Aug-2025

    Appearance

    2nd Jt. Cjjd JMFC Nilanga

  7. 08-May-2025

    Appearance

    2nd Jt. Cjjd JMFC Nilanga

  8. 25-Apr-2025

    Appearance

    2nd Jt. Cjjd JMFC Nilanga

  9. 24-Dec-2024

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  10. 12-Dec-2024

    Case filed

    Registration No. 2809/2024

casestatus.in Summary

The court discharged accused Ramesh Laxman Shinde from charges under Section 65(e) of the Bombay Prohibition Act, invoking Section 258 of the CrPC, as the accused could not be traced despite multiple summons and no Chargeability (CA) report was received. The court found it futile to keep the case pending and cancelled his bail bonds; seized materials were ordered disposed as per rules. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case