State of Maharashtra P.S.O. Veltur vs Harshal Moreshwar Thamke — 301/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 285. Disposed: Uncontested--CONVICTED ON PLEAD GUILTY / PLEA BARGAINING on 14th March 2026.
S.C.C. - Sum Case
CNR: MHNG110003962026
Filing Number
371/2026
Filing Date
11-03-2026
Registration No
301/2026
Registration Date
11-03-2026
Court
Civil Judge Junior Division , Kuhi
Judge
1-Civil JudgeJr.Dn. J.M.F.C.Kuhi
Decision Date
14th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--CONVICTED ON PLEAD GUILTY / PLEA BARGAINING
FIR Details
FIR Number
50
Police Station
Veltur
Year
2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State of Maharashtra P.S.O. Veltur
Adv. A.P.P.
Respondent(s)
Harshal Moreshwar Thamke
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Civil JudgeJr.Dn. J.M.F.C.Kuhi
Disposed
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 14-03-2026 | Disposed |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: State of Maharashtra v. Harshal Moreshwar Thamke (301/2026) The Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kuhi convicted Harshal Moreshwar Thamke (age 26) of an offense under Section 285 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita for parking his vehicle in an obstructive manner on a public way on 05/03/2026. The accused voluntarily pleaded guilty after the charges were explained to him in vernacular. Considering the nature of the offense, the accused's weak economic condition, and family responsibilities, the magistrate sentenced him to pay a fine of Rs. 500, with a default provision of simple imprisonment for 3 days. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: State of Maharashtra v. Harshal Moreshwar Thamke (301/2026) The Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kuhi convicted Harshal Moreshwar Thamke (age 26) of an offense under Section 285 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita for parking his vehicle in an obstructive manner on a public way on 05/03/2026. The accused voluntarily pleaded guilty after the charges were explained to him in vernacular. Considering the nature of the offense, the accused's weak economic condition, and family responsibilities, the magistrate sentenced him to pay a fine of Rs. 500, with a default provision of simple imprisonment for 3 days. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts