State through Pimpalgaon Police Station vs Sudam Amarshingh Chavan Advocate - Hadole Pravin B. — 525/2022

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

Case disposed

S.C.C. - Summons/Summary Criminal Case

CNR: MHNS130011012022

Filing Number

834/2022

Filing Date

12-Oct-2022

Registration No

525/2022

Registration Date

12-Oct-2022

Court

Civil and Criminal Court, Pimpalgaon Baswant

Judge

3-2Nd Joint CIVIL Judge Jd And JMFC Pimpalgaon

Decision Date

23-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ACQUITTED

Last updated 29-Apr-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

190

Police Station

PIMPALGAON POLICE STATION

Year

2022

Acts & Sections

Maharashtra Prohibition Act Section 65(e)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.State through Pimpalgaon Police Station

    Adv. Varungashe Manisha A.

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Sudam Amarshingh Chavan Advocate - Hadole Pravin B.

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 23-Mar-2026

    Copy of JudgmentView PDF

    Summary The court acquitted the accused (Sudam Amarsing Chavan) in a case under the Maharashtra Prohibition Act, section 65(E), finding that the prosecution failed to prove the charge of possessing illicit liquor beyond reasonable doubt. The court determined that the sole prosecution witness's testimony was unreliable and contained significant contradictions, while the accused's defense testimony raised reasonable doubt about guilt. Consequently, the accused was discharged and all bonds/securities were ordered to be cancelled. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 23-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    2Nd Joint CIVIL Judge Jd And JMFC Pimpalgaon

  4. 17-Mar-2026

    Arguments

    2Nd Joint CIVIL Judge Jd And JMFC Pimpalgaon

  5. 10-Mar-2026

    Statement U/sec.313 Cr.P.C.

    2Nd Joint CIVIL Judge Jd And JMFC Pimpalgaon

  6. 17-Feb-2026

    Statement U/sec.313 Cr.P.C.

    2Nd Joint CIVIL Judge Jd And JMFC Pimpalgaon

  7. 23-Jan-2026

    Statement U/sec.313 Cr.P.C.

    2Nd Joint CIVIL Judge Jd And JMFC Pimpalgaon

  8. 01-Jan-2026

    Evidence Part Heard

    2Nd Joint CIVIL Judge Jd And JMFC Pimpalgaon

  9. 25-Nov-2025

    Evidence Part Heard

    2Nd Joint CIVIL Judge Jd And JMFC Pimpalgaon

  10. 14-Oct-2025

    Evidence Part Heard

    2Nd Joint CIVIL Judge Jd And JMFC Pimpalgaon

  11. 10-Sep-2025

    Evidence Part Heard

    2Nd Joint CIVIL Judge Jd And JMFC Pimpalgaon

  12. 14-Aug-2025

    Evidence Part Heard

    2Nd Joint CIVIL Judge Jd And JMFC Pimpalgaon

  13. 07-Jul-2025

    Evidence Part Heard

    2Nd Joint CIVIL Judge Jd And JMFC Pimpalgaon

  14. 30-May-2025

    Awaiting Summons

    2Nd Joint CIVIL Judge Jd And JMFC Pimpalgaon

  15. 04-Apr-2025

    Awaiting Summons

    2Nd Joint CIVIL Judge Jd And JMFC Pimpalgaon

  16. 03-Mar-2025

    Hearing

    2Nd Joint CIVIL Judge Jd And JMFC Pimpalgaon

  17. 20-Feb-2025

    Hearing

    2Nd Joint CIVIL Judge Jd And JMFC Pimpalgaon

  18. 27-Jan-2025

    Hearing

    2Nd Joint CIVIL Judge Jd And JMFC Pimpalgaon

  19. 18-Nov-2024

    Hearing

    CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC

  20. 12-Aug-2024

    Hearing

    CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC

  21. 09-May-2024

    Hearing

    CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC

  22. 05-Apr-2024

    Hearing

    CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC

  23. 18-Jan-2024

    Hearing

    CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC

  24. 09-Nov-2023

    B.W._Unready

    CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC

  25. 14-Aug-2023

    B.W._Unready

    CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC

  26. 14-Jun-2023

    B.W._Unready

    CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC

  27. 12-Apr-2023

    Awaiting Summons

    CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC

  28. 11-Jan-2023

    Awaiting Summons

    CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC

  29. 12-Oct-2022

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  30. 12-Oct-2022

    Case filed

    Registration No. 525/2022

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The court acquitted the accused (Sudam Amarsing Chavan) in a case under the Maharashtra Prohibition Act, section 65(E), finding that the prosecution failed to prove the charge of possessing illicit liquor beyond reasonable doubt. The court determined that the sole prosecution witness's testimony was unreliable and contained significant contradictions, while the accused's defense testimony raised reasonable doubt about guilt. Consequently, the accused was discharged and all bonds/securities were ordered to be cancelled. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case