State Of Maharashtra vs Dhanaji Manohar Jadhav — 1238/2024

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

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

CNR: MHLA140034112024

Case disposed

Filing Number

1398/2024

Filing Date

04-12-2024

Registration No

1238/2024

Registration Date

04-12-2024

Court

Civil Court Junior Division , Ausa

Judge

1-Jt. CJJD JMFC Ausa

Decision Date

13th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

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

FIR Details

FIR Number

0011

Police Station

Police Station Ausa

Year

2024

Acts & Sections

MAHARASHTRA PROHIBITION ACT Section 65(e)

Petitioner(s)

State Of Maharashtra

Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

Dhanaji Manohar Jadhav

Hearing History

Judge: 1-Jt. CJJD JMFC Ausa

13-03-2026

Disposed

22-12-2025

Appearance

30-09-2025

Appearance

14-07-2025

Appearance

11-04-2025

Appearance

Final Orders / Judgements

13-03-2026
Order on Exhibit

Case Summary: State Of Maharashtra v. Dhanaji Manohar Jadhav (1238/2024) The court stopped proceedings under Section 258 of the Criminal Procedure Code against Dhanaji Manohar Jadhav, who was charged under Section 65(e) of the Maharashtra Prohibition Act. The court found the trial futile due to the accused's consistent non-appearance, prosecution's failure to secure witness attendance despite multiple opportunities, and the missing Complaint Analysis report after over one year of pendency. The accused was released, bail/surety discharged, and seized materials to be disposed per procedure after appeal period. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: State Of Maharashtra v. Dhanaji Manohar Jadhav (1238/2024) The court stopped proceedings under Section 258 of the Criminal Procedure Code against Dhanaji Manohar Jadhav, who was charged under Section 65(e) of the Maharashtra Prohibition Act. The court found the trial futile due to the accused's consistent non-appearance, prosecution's failure to secure witness attendance despite multiple opportunities, and the missing Complaint Analysis report after over one year of pendency. The accused was released, bail/surety discharged, and seized materials to be disposed per procedure after appeal period. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

Civil Court Junior Division , Ausa All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case