State of Mah. Excise Duties Dept. Nagpur, Dist. Nagpur vs Gajanan Devrao Murkute — 270/2024

Case under Maharashtra Prohibition Act Section 65(E). Disposed: Uncontested--ACQUITTED on 23rd March 2026.

Case disposed

S.C.C. - Sum Case

CNR: MHNG170004882024

Filing Number

433/2024

Filing Date

26-Jul-2024

Registration No

270/2024

Registration Date

26-Jul-2024

Court

Civil Court Junior Division , Bhiwapur

Judge

1-CIVIL Judge Jr.dn. And J.m.f.c.,bhiwapur

Decision Date

23-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--ACQUITTED

Last updated 24-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Maharashtra Prohibition Act Section 65(E)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.State of Mah. Excise Duties Dept. Nagpur, Dist. Nagpur

    Adv. V. W. Wankhade

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Gajanan Devrao Murkute

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 23-Mar-2026

    Copy of JudgmentView PDF

    Court Decision Summary The court acquitted the accused, Gajanan Devraj Murkute, of charges under Section 65(E) of the Maharashtra Prohibition Act (illegal possession of 27 bottles of country liquor). The prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt due to critical evidentiary gaps: only one witness was examined instead of five summoned witnesses, no chemical analysis was conducted to confirm the seized bottles contained illicit alcohol, and no panchanama (seizure witnesses) were properly established, creating reasonable doubt about the seizure itself. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 23-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    CIVIL Judge Jr.dn. And J.m.f.c.,bhiwapur

  4. 12-Mar-2026

    Arguments

    CIVIL Judge Jr.dn. And J.m.f.c.,bhiwapur

  5. 24-Feb-2026

    Evidence Part Heard

    CIVIL Judge Jr.dn. And J.m.f.c.,bhiwapur

  6. 12-Feb-2026

    Evidence Part Heard

    CIVIL Judge Jr.dn. And J.m.f.c.,bhiwapur

  7. 30-Jan-2026

    Evidence Part Heard

    CIVIL Judge Jr.dn. And J.m.f.c.,bhiwapur

  8. 17-Jan-2026

    EvidenceView PDF

  9. 17-Jan-2026

    Evidence Part Heard

    CIVIL Judge Jr.dn. And J.m.f.c.,bhiwapur

  10. 22-Dec-2025

    Evidence

    CIVIL Judge Jr.dn. And J.m.f.c.,bhiwapur

  11. 08-Dec-2025

    Evidence

    CIVIL Judge Jr.dn. And J.m.f.c.,bhiwapur

  12. 27-Nov-2025

    Evidence

    CIVIL Judge Jr.dn. And J.m.f.c.,bhiwapur

  13. 17-Nov-2025

    Evidence

    CIVIL Judge Jr.dn. And J.m.f.c.,bhiwapur

  14. 03-Nov-2025

    Evidence

    CIVIL Judge Jr.dn. And J.m.f.c.,bhiwapur

  15. 14-Oct-2025

    Evidence

    CIVIL Judge Jr.dn. And J.m.f.c.,bhiwapur

  16. 04-Oct-2025

    Evidence

    CIVIL Judge Jr.dn. And J.m.f.c.,bhiwapur

  17. 22-Sep-2025

    Evidence

    CIVIL Judge Jr.dn. And J.m.f.c.,bhiwapur

  18. 11-Sep-2025

    Evidence

    CIVIL Judge Jr.dn. And J.m.f.c.,bhiwapur

  19. 26-Aug-2025

    Plea / Particulars

    CIVIL Judge Jr.dn. And J.m.f.c.,bhiwapur

  20. 28-Jul-2025

    Awaiting Summons

    CIVIL Judge Jr.dn. And J.m.f.c.,bhiwapur

  21. 24-Jun-2025

    Awaiting Summons

    CIVIL Judge Jr.dn. And J.m.f.c.,bhiwapur

  22. 28-Apr-2025

    Awaiting Summons

    CIVIL Judge Jr.dn. And J.m.f.c.,bhiwapur

  23. 19-Mar-2025

    Awaiting Summons

    CIVIL Judge Jr.dn. And J.m.f.c.,bhiwapur

  24. 24-Feb-2025

    Awaiting Summons

    CIVIL Judge Jr.dn. And J.m.f.c.,bhiwapur

  25. 10-Jan-2025

    Awaiting Summons

    CIVIL Judge Jr.dn. And J.m.f.c.,bhiwapur

  26. 22-Nov-2024

    Awaiting Summons

    CIVIL Judge Jr.dn. And J.m.f.c.,bhiwapur

  27. 14-Oct-2024

    Awaiting Summons

    CIVIL Judge Jr.dn. And J.m.f.c.,bhiwapur

  28. 29-Aug-2024

    Awaiting Summons

    CIVIL Judge Jr.dn. And J.m.f.c.,bhiwapur

  29. 26-Jul-2024

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  30. 26-Jul-2024

    Case filed

    Registration No. 270/2024

casestatus.in Summary

Court Decision Summary The court acquitted the accused, Gajanan Devraj Murkute, of charges under Section 65(E) of the Maharashtra Prohibition Act (illegal possession of 27 bottles of country liquor). The prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt due to critical evidentiary gaps: only one witness was examined instead of five summoned witnesses, no chemical analysis was conducted to confirm the seized bottles contained illicit alcohol, and no panchanama (seizure witnesses) were properly established, creating reasonable doubt about the seizure itself. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case