State of Mah. through Police Station, Bhiwapur vs Anil Surabhi Solanki — 368/2025
Case under Maharashtra Prohibition Act Section 65(e). Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 12th March 2026.
S.C.C. - Sum Case
CNR: MHNG170005622025
e-Filing Number
01-07-2025
Filing Number
526/2025
Filing Date
08-07-2025
Registration No
368/2025
Registration Date
09-07-2025
Court
Civil Court Junior Division , Bhiwapur
Judge
1-CIVIL JUDGE JR.DN. AND J.M.F.C.,BHIWAPUR
Decision Date
12th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ACQUITTED
FIR Details
FIR Number
289
Police Station
Bhiwapur
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State of Mah. through Police Station, Bhiwapur
Adv. Adv. S. S. More
Respondent(s)
Anil Surabhi Solanki
Hearing History
Judge: 1-CIVIL JUDGE JR.DN. AND J.M.F.C.,BHIWAPUR
Disposed
Statement U/sec.313 Cr.P.C.
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 12-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 09-03-2026 | Statement U/sec.313 Cr.P.C. |
| 23-02-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
| 12-02-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
| 02-02-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The court acquitted the accused Anil Solki under the Maharashtra Prohibition Act, Section 65(E), finding that the prosecution failed to establish the charges beyond reasonable doubt. Although a chemical report confirmed the seized bottles contained country-made liquor, the prosecution could not prove through credible witness testimony that the accused was in possession of the liquor or that the seizure was conducted properly with authorized panch (witness) support, creating sufficient doubt about the evidence chain. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The court acquitted the accused Anil Solki under the Maharashtra Prohibition Act, Section 65(E), finding that the prosecution failed to establish the charges beyond reasonable doubt. Although a chemical report confirmed the seized bottles contained country-made liquor, the prosecution could not prove through credible witness testimony that the accused was in possession of the liquor or that the seizure was conducted properly with authorized panch (witness) support, creating sufficient doubt about the evidence chain. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts