P.S. Hingna vs Oshish Pandurangji Bhagat Advocate - Bhushan H.Naik — 1033/2021

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 188,270. Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 16th May 2026.

S.C.C. - Sum Case

CNR: MHNG150016932021

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

28-09-2021

Filing Number

1553/2021

Filing Date

28-09-2021

Registration No

1033/2021

Registration Date

28-09-2021

Court

Civil Court Junior Division , Hingna

Judge

1-Civil Judge Jr.Dn. and J.M.F.C.Hingna

Decision Date

16th May 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ACQUITTED

FIR Details

FIR Number

327

Police Station

Hingana

Year

2021

Acts & Sections

Indian Penal Code Section 188,270
Maharashtra Prohibition Act Section 68
Disaster Management Act Section 51(b)
Epidemic Diseases Act Section 3

Petitioner(s)

P.S. Hingna

Respondent(s)

Oshish Pandurangji Bhagat Advocate - Bhushan H.Naik

Dharampal Gulabrao Moon

Adv. Bhushan Naik

Hearing History

Judge: 1-Civil Judge Jr.Dn. and J.M.F.C.Hingna

16-05-2026

Disposed

07-04-2026

Evidence

12-03-2026

Evidence

03-02-2026

Evidence

23-12-2025

Evidence

Final Orders / Judgements

16-05-2026
Copy of Judgment

Court Judgment Summary The Hingana First Class Magistrate Court acquitted two accused persons of charges under IPC Sections 188 and 270, Disaster Management Act Section 51-B, and Epidemic Diseases Act Section 3, finding insufficient evidence to prove they violated COVID-19 lockdown orders by operating a eatery and serving alcohol during the lockdown period in July 2021. The court determined that the procedural requirements for filing such cases were not met and that the prosecution failed to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Court Judgment Summary The Hingana First Class Magistrate Court acquitted two accused persons of charges under IPC Sections 188 and 270, Disaster Management Act Section 51-B, and Epidemic Diseases Act Section 3, finding insufficient evidence to prove they violated COVID-19 lockdown orders by operating a eatery and serving alcohol during the lockdown period in July 2021. The court determined that the procedural requirements for filing such cases were not met and that the prosecution failed to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

Civil Court Junior Division , Hingna All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case