P. S. Chakur. vs Tukaram s/o Dhondiram Jadhav Advocate - Gambhire Santosh V — 70/2019
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 324,341,323,504, 506,34. Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 30th March 2026.
R.C.C. - Regular Criminal Case
CNR: MHLA150007202019
Filing Number
327/2019
Filing Date
30-07-2019
Registration No
70/2019
Registration Date
30-07-2019
Court
Civil Court Junior Division , Chakur
Judge
1-Civil Judge J.D. and J.M.F.C. Chakur
Decision Date
30th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ACQUITTED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
P. S. Chakur.
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
Tukaram s/o Dhondiram Jadhav Advocate - Gambhire Santosh V
Prashant s/o Mohanrao Kinikar
Adv. Gambhire Santosh V
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Civil Judge J.D. and J.M.F.C. Chakur
Disposed
Arguments
Arguments
Arguments
Statement U/sec.313 Cr.P.C.
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 30-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 24-03-2026 | Arguments |
| 13-03-2026 | Arguments |
| 27-02-2026 | Arguments |
| 16-01-2026 | Statement U/sec.313 Cr.P.C. |
Final Orders / Judgements
CASE SUMMARY: 70/2019 The court acquitted both defendants (Tukaram Jadhav and Prashant Kinikar) of charges under IPC sections 341, 324, 504, 506 with section 34. The prosecution failed to establish the allegations of wrongful restraint, voluntarily causing hurt, criminal intimidation, and criminal intimidation with threats to life. Key witness testimonies lacked credibility—witnesses claimed no knowledge of when, where, or how the alleged incident occurred. The medical evidence regarding the victim's injuries could not definitively prove causation by the defendants' assault. The court found insufficient evidence to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
CASE SUMMARY: 70/2019 The court acquitted both defendants (Tukaram Jadhav and Prashant Kinikar) of charges under IPC sections 341, 324, 504, 506 with section 34. The prosecution failed to establish the allegations of wrongful restraint, voluntarily causing hurt, criminal intimidation, and criminal intimidation with threats to life. Key witness testimonies lacked credibility—witnesses claimed no knowledge of when, where, or how the alleged incident occurred. The medical evidence regarding the victim's injuries could not definitively prove causation by the defendants' assault. The court found insufficient evidence to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts