State of Maharashtra through PSO Parseoni vs Sumar Shankar Naitam — 94/2026

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: MHNG140001552026

Filing Number

148/2026

Filing Date

26-Feb-2026

Registration No

94/2026

Registration Date

26-Feb-2026

Court

Civil Court Junior Division , Parseoni

Judge

14-Civil Judge Jr.Dn J.M.F.C.Parshioni.

Decision Date

14-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--CONVICTED ON PLEAD GUILTY / PLEA BARGAINING

Last updated 09-Jun-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

67

Police Station

Parshioni

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 285

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.State of Maharashtra through PSO Parseoni

    Adv. App

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Sumar Shankar Naitam

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    Copy of JudgmentView PDF

    Case Summary: State of Maharashtra v. Sumar Shankar Naitam (94/2026) The accused, a 42-year-old driver, pleaded guilty to parking his vehicle in an obstructive manner on a public road on 09/02/2026, violating Section 285 of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023. The court convicted him and imposed a lenient sentence of Rs. 400 fine (or one day simple imprisonment in default), considering his lack of prior criminal antecedents and financial hardship. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 14-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Civil Judge Jr.Dn J.M.F.C.Parshioni.

  4. 26-Feb-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  5. 26-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 94/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: State of Maharashtra v. Sumar Shankar Naitam (94/2026) The accused, a 42-year-old driver, pleaded guilty to parking his vehicle in an obstructive manner on a public road on 09/02/2026, violating Section 285 of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023. The court convicted him and imposed a lenient sentence of Rs. 400 fine (or one day simple imprisonment in default), considering his lack of prior criminal antecedents and financial hardship. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case