State of Maharashtra thr. P. S. Umrer vs Satish Bhaskar Katole — 805/2024
Case under Maharashtra Prohibition Act Section 65(e). Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 12th March 2026.
S.C.C. - Sum Case
CNR: MHNG100015892024
Filing Number
1084/2024
Filing Date
14-10-2024
Registration No
805/2024
Registration Date
14-10-2024
Court
Civil Court Junior Division , Umrer
Judge
1-JT.CIVIL JUDGE JR. DVN. J.M.F.C.UMRER
Decision Date
12th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ACQUITTED
FIR Details
FIR Number
428
Police Station
Umrer
Year
2024
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State of Maharashtra thr. P. S. Umrer
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
Satish Bhaskar Katole
Hearing History
Judge: 1-JT.CIVIL JUDGE JR. DVN. J.M.F.C.UMRER
Disposed
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 12-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 20-02-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
| 09-01-2026 | Evidence |
| 07-11-2025 | Evidence |
| 16-09-2025 | Evidence |
Final Orders / Judgements
Court Decision Summary The court acquitted accused Satish Bhaskar Katole of charges under Maharashtra Prohibition Act, Section 65(E) for allegedly possessing and selling 12 sealed containers of illicit liquor. The court found that the prosecution failed to establish the case beyond reasonable doubt, as the two witnesses (panchas) who merely acknowledged their signatures on the panchnama did not provide substantive support to the prosecution's case, and no corroborating evidence proved the seized items were recovered from the accused's possession. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Court Decision Summary The court acquitted accused Satish Bhaskar Katole of charges under Maharashtra Prohibition Act, Section 65(E) for allegedly possessing and selling 12 sealed containers of illicit liquor. The court found that the prosecution failed to establish the case beyond reasonable doubt, as the two witnesses (panchas) who merely acknowledged their signatures on the panchnama did not provide substantive support to the prosecution's case, and no corroborating evidence proved the seized items were recovered from the accused's possession. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts