State of Maharashtra vs Dnyaneshwar Bhaurao Suryawanshi — 1301/2025

Case under Maharashtra Prohibition Act Section 65(e). Disposed: Uncontested--U/SEC. 258 OF CR.PC on 08th May 2026.

Case disposed

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

CNR: MHLA120034452025

Filing Number

2053/2025

Filing Date

03-Dec-2025

Registration No

1301/2025

Registration Date

03-Dec-2025

Court

Civil Court Junior Division , Nilanga

Judge

2-2nd Jt. Cjjd JMFC Nilanga

Decision Date

08-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

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

Last updated 04-Jun-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

300

Police Station

Aurad Shahajani

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

Maharashtra Prohibition Act Section 65(e)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.State of Maharashtra

    Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Dnyaneshwar Bhaurao Suryawanshi

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 08-May-2026

    Order on ExhibitView PDF

    The court stopped proceedings and discharged accused Dnyaneshwar Bhaurao Suryawanshi under Section 281 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita for an alleged Bombay Prohibition Act violation (Section 65(e)), finding that the prosecution failed to secure his presence despite multiple summons and the police machinery's failure to apprehend him. The court concluded no purpose would be served keeping the case pending. The accused's bail bonds were cancelled and seized materials were ordered disposed of. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 08-May-2026

    Disposed

    2nd Jt. Cjjd JMFC Nilanga

  4. 13-Mar-2026

    Appearance

    2nd Jt. Cjjd JMFC Nilanga

  5. 16-Dec-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 03-Dec-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. 1301/2025

casestatus.in Summary

The court stopped proceedings and discharged accused Dnyaneshwar Bhaurao Suryawanshi under Section 281 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita for an alleged Bombay Prohibition Act violation (Section 65(e)), finding that the prosecution failed to secure his presence despite multiple summons and the police machinery's failure to apprehend him. The court concluded no purpose would be served keeping the case pending. The accused's bail bonds were cancelled and seized materials were ordered disposed of. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case