State Of Maharashtra vs Dayanand Machindra Kohale — 1225/2024

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

Case disposed

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

CNR: MHLA140033702024

Filing Number

1389/2024

Filing Date

30-Nov-2024

Registration No

1225/2024

Registration Date

30-Nov-2024

Court

Civil Court Junior Division , Ausa

Judge

1-Jt. Cjjd JMFC Ausa

Decision Date

13-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

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

Last updated 04-Jun-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

358

Police Station

Police Station Ausa

Year

2024

Acts & Sections

Maharashtra Prohibition Act Section 65(a),65(e)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.State Of Maharashtra

    Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Dayanand Machindra Kohale

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 13-Mar-2026

    Order on ExhibitView PDF

    The court dismissed proceedings against accused Dayanand Machindra Kohale under Section 258 CrPC in a Maharashtra Prohibition Act case, finding the prosecution had failed to take necessary steps despite multiple opportunities and over one year of pendency. The accused was released, bail bonds discharged, and seized property ordered disposed after the appeal period concludes. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 13-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Jt. Cjjd JMFC Ausa

  4. 17-Dec-2025

    Appearance

    Jt. Cjjd JMFC Ausa

  5. 22-Sep-2025

    Appearance

    Jt. Cjjd JMFC Ausa

  6. 20-Jun-2025

    Appearance

    Jt. Cjjd JMFC Ausa

  7. 27-Mar-2025

    Appearance

    Jt. Cjjd JMFC Ausa

  8. 02-Jan-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  9. 30-Nov-2024

    Case filed

    Registration No. 1225/2024

casestatus.in Summary

The court dismissed proceedings against accused Dayanand Machindra Kohale under Section 258 CrPC in a Maharashtra Prohibition Act case, finding the prosecution had failed to take necessary steps despite multiple opportunities and over one year of pendency. The accused was released, bail bonds discharged, and seized property ordered disposed after the appeal period concludes. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case