State of Maharashtra vs Devashish Dilip Haldar — 741/2022

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 175,179,419,420. Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 30th March 2026.

Case disposed

R.C.C. - Regular Criminal Case

CNR: MHLA120036932022

Filing Number

3693/2022

Filing Date

01-Nov-2022

Registration No

741/2022

Registration Date

01-Nov-2022

Court

Civil Court Junior Division , Nilanga

Judge

1-Jt. C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C. Nilanga

Decision Date

30-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ACQUITTED

Last updated 04-Jun-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

195

Police Station

Aurad Shahajani

Year

2022

Acts & Sections

Indian Penal Code Section 175,179,419,420
Maharashtra Medical Practitioners Act Section 33(A)
Indian Medical Council Act Section 15(2)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.State of Maharashtra

    Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Devashish Dilip Haldar

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 30-Mar-2026

    Copy of JudgmentView PDF

    Case Summary: 741/2022 (State of Maharashtra v. Devashish Dilip Haldar) The court acquitted Dr. Devashish Dilip Haldar of charges under IPC Sections 420, 419, 175, 179, Medical Council Act 1956 Section 15(2), and Maharashtra Medical Practitioners Act 1961 Section 33(a) for practicing medicine without valid qualifications. The prosecution failed to prove its case through sufficient evidence—the scene inspection and seizure panchnamas were not properly corroborated by witnesses, and the complainant's testimony was not recorded. The court found the prosecution did not establish that the accused practiced medicine fraudulently or that he lacked proper medical credentials, hence ordering his acquittal and release on personal bond of ₹15,000. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 30-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Jt. C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C. Nilanga

  4. 13-Mar-2026

    Arguments

    Jt. C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C. Nilanga

  5. 27-Feb-2026

    Arguments

    Jt. C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C. Nilanga

  6. 22-Jan-2026

    EvidenceView PDF

  7. 22-Jan-2026

    Evidence Part Heard

    Jt. C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C. Nilanga

  8. 16-Dec-2025

    Evidence Part Heard

    Jt. C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C. Nilanga

  9. 07-Oct-2025

    Evidence Part Heard

    Jt. C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C. Nilanga

  10. 28-Aug-2025

    Evidence Part Heard

    Jt. C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C. Nilanga

  11. 28-Jul-2025

    Evidence Part Heard

    Jt. C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C. Nilanga

  12. 27-Jun-2025

    Evidence Part Heard

    Jt. C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C. Nilanga

  13. 13-May-2025

    EvidenceView PDF

  14. 13-May-2025

    EvidenceView PDF

  15. 13-May-2025

    EvidenceView PDF

  16. 13-May-2025

    Evidence Part Heard

    2nd Jt. Cjjd JMFC Nilanga

  17. 15-Mar-2025

    Evidence Part Heard

    2nd Jt. Cjjd JMFC Nilanga

  18. 10-Feb-2025

    EvidenceView PDF

  19. 10-Feb-2025

    Evidence Part Heard

    2nd Jt. Cjjd JMFC Nilanga

  20. 07-Nov-2024

    Awaiting Muddemal

    2nd Jt. Cjjd JMFC Nilanga

  21. 21-Sep-2024

    Awaiting Muddemal

    2nd Jt. Cjjd JMFC Nilanga

  22. 29-Jul-2024

    Awaiting Muddemal

    2nd Jt. Cjjd JMFC Nilanga

  23. 14-May-2024

    Awaiting Muddemal

    2nd Jt. Cjjd JMFC Nilanga

  24. 22-Mar-2024

    Awaiting Muddemal

    2nd Jt. Cjjd JMFC Nilanga

  25. 30-Jan-2024

    Awaiting Muddemal

    2nd Jt. Cjjd JMFC Nilanga

  26. 20-Oct-2023

    Order on ExhibitView PDF

  27. 20-Oct-2023

    Awaiting Muddemal

    2nd Jt. Cjjd JMFC Nilanga

  28. 27-Jul-2023

    Appearance

    2nd Jt. Cjjd JMFC Nilanga

  29. 12-May-2023

    Appearance

    2nd Jt. Cjjd JMFC Nilanga

  30. 02-Dec-2022

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  31. 01-Nov-2022

    Case filed

    Registration No. 741/2022

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: 741/2022 (State of Maharashtra v. Devashish Dilip Haldar) The court acquitted Dr. Devashish Dilip Haldar of charges under IPC Sections 420, 419, 175, 179, Medical Council Act 1956 Section 15(2), and Maharashtra Medical Practitioners Act 1961 Section 33(a) for practicing medicine without valid qualifications. The prosecution failed to prove its case through sufficient evidence—the scene inspection and seizure panchnamas were not properly corroborated by witnesses, and the complainant's testimony was not recorded. The court found the prosecution did not establish that the accused practiced medicine fraudulently or that he lacked proper medical credentials, hence ordering his acquittal and release on personal bond of ₹15,000. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case