State of Maharashtra vs Manoj Madan Pawar Advocate - APP Katol. — 1117/2022

Case under Maharashtra Prohibition Act Section 65(E). Disposed: Uncontested--U/SEC. 258 OF CR.PC on 10th March 2026.

S.C.C. - Sum Case

CNR: MHNG070017002022

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

1596/2022

Filing Date

10-10-2022

Registration No

1117/2022

Registration Date

10-10-2022

Court

Civil Judge Junior Division , Katol

Judge

1-Jt. Civil JudgeJr.Dn. J.M.F.C Katol

Decision Date

10th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

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

FIR Details

FIR Number

510

Police Station

Katol

Year

2022

Acts & Sections

MAHARASHTRA PROHIBITION ACT Section 65(E)

Petitioner(s)

State of Maharashtra

Adv. APP Katol.

Respondent(s)

Manoj Madan Pawar Advocate - APP (Assistant Public Prosecutor) Katol.

Hearing History

Judge: 1-Jt. Civil JudgeJr.Dn. J.M.F.C Katol

10-03-2026

Disposed

23-12-2025

Awaiting Summons

07-08-2025

Awaiting Summons

08-05-2025

Awaiting Summons

04-04-2025

Awaiting Summons

Final Orders / Judgements

10-03-2026
Copy of Judgment

The court discharged the accused Manoj Pawar of charges under Section 65-e of the Maharashtra Prohibition Act, 1949, and stopped proceedings under Section 258 of the CrPC. The decision was based on the case being over three years old, the prosecution's repeated failure to secure the accused's presence despite multiple summons, and the absence of any likelihood of future appearance. The seized motorcycle was confirmed to be returned to its owner after the appeal period. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

The court discharged the accused Manoj Pawar of charges under Section 65-e of the Maharashtra Prohibition Act, 1949, and stopped proceedings under Section 258 of the CrPC. The decision was based on the case being over three years old, the prosecution's repeated failure to secure the accused's presence despite multiple summons, and the absence of any likelihood of future appearance. The seized motorcycle was confirmed to be returned to its owner after the 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 Judge Junior Division , Katol All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case