State Government Thorug P.S.O. Jalalkheda vs Sagar Dnyaneshwar Umak — 370/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 285. Disposed: Uncontested--CONVICTED ON PLEAD GUILTY / PLEA BARGAINING on 14th March 2026.

Case disposed

S.C.C. - Sum Case

CNR: MHNG120005312026

e-Filing Number

09-03-2026

Filing Number

468/2026

Filing Date

09-Mar-2026

Registration No

370/2026

Registration Date

09-Mar-2026

Court

Civil Judge Junior Division , Narkhed

Judge

1-Civil Judge Jr Division First Class , Narkhed

Decision Date

14-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--CONVICTED ON PLEAD GUILTY / PLEA BARGAINING

Last updated 09-Jun-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

124

Police Station

P.S.Jalalkheda

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 285

Petitioner(s)

1.State Government Thorug P.S.O. Jalalkheda

Respondent(s)

1.Sagar Dnyaneshwar Umak

Case History

Case disposedDisposed
14-Mar-2026

Order on ExhibitView PDF

Case 370/2026 Summary: The Judicial Magistrate convicted Sagar Dnyaneshwar Umak under Section 285 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (substance of acquisition) after he pleaded guilty to the charges. The court accepted his voluntary plea, noting his poverty and lack of prior criminal record, and applied a lenient view. Umak was sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 200 or, in default, simple imprisonment for 3 days. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
14-Mar-2026

Disposed

Civil Judge Jr Division First Class , Narkhed
09-Mar-2026

First hearing

Initial hearing scheduled
09-Mar-2026

Case filed

Registration No. 370/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case 370/2026 Summary: The Judicial Magistrate convicted Sagar Dnyaneshwar Umak under Section 285 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (substance of acquisition) after he pleaded guilty to the charges. The court accepted his voluntary plea, noting his poverty and lack of prior criminal record, and applied a lenient view. Umak was sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 200 or, in default, simple imprisonment for 3 days. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.