State Ambad Police stn Nashik vs Taufiq alias Shahrukh Rafiq Shaikh Advocate - Shaikh Javed S. — 71/2025
Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 137(2),64(1),65,70. Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 02nd April 2026.
Spl.Case - Special Case (Sessions)
CNR: MHNS010018432025
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
794/2025
Filing Date
01-03-2025
Registration No
71/2025
Registration Date
01-03-2025
Court
District and Sessions Court , Nashik
Judge
10-DISTRICT JUDGE-5 AND ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE, NASHIK
Decision Date
02nd April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ACQUITTED
FIR Details
FIR Number
871
Police Station
AMBAD POLICE STATION
Year
2024
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State Ambad Police stn Nashik
Adv. Misar Ajay S. DGP.
Respondent(s)
Taufiq alias Shahrukh Rafiq Shaikh Advocate - Shaikh Javed S.
Swapnil Sanjaykumar Shewale
Bhushan Amol Kuntalwar
Ajinkya Ramakant Gosavi
Hearing History
Judge: 10-DISTRICT JUDGE-5 AND ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE, NASHIK
Disposed
Judgment
Judgment
Arguments
Arguments
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 02-04-2026 | Disposed | |
| 01-04-2026 | Judgment | |
| 30-03-2026 | Judgment | |
| 27-03-2026 | Arguments | |
| 25-03-2026 | Arguments |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The Special (POCSO) Court in Nashik acquitted all four accused persons—Taufique @ Shahrukh Shafique Shaikh, Swapnil Sanjaykumar Shewale, Bhushan Amol Kuntalwar, and Ajinkya Ramakant Gosavi—of charges under BNS sections 137(2), 70 and POCSO Act sections 4, 6, finding that the victim's own testimony contradicted the prosecution's allegations and that circumstantial evidence (forensic reports, fingerprints) failed to prove the alleged gang rape. The court found the prosecution had not proven its case beyond reasonable doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The Special (POCSO) Court in Nashik acquitted all four accused persons—Taufique @ Shahrukh Shafique Shaikh, Swapnil Sanjaykumar Shewale, Bhushan Amol Kuntalwar, and Ajinkya Ramakant Gosavi—of charges under BNS sections 137(2), 70 and POCSO Act sections 4, 6, finding that the victim's own testimony contradicted the prosecution's allegations and that circumstantial evidence (forensic reports, fingerprints) failed to prove the alleged gang rape. The court found the prosecution had not proven its case beyond reasonable doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts