State Through Dindori Police Station. vs Ghanshyam Govardhan Chavan Advocate - Ghorpade Pradip S. — 38/2024

Case under Maharashtra Prohibition Act Section 65(e). Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 10th March 2026.

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

CNR: MHNS140000582024

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

04-01-2024

Filing Number

50/2024

Filing Date

08-01-2024

Registration No

38/2024

Registration Date

08-01-2024

Court

Civil and Criminal Court ,Dindori

Judge

2-CIVIL JUDGE J.D. AND JMFC DINDORI

Decision Date

10th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ACQUITTED

FIR Details

FIR Number

492

Police Station

DINDORI POLICE STATION

Year

2023

Acts & Sections

MAHARASHTRA PROHIBITION ACT Section 65(e)

Petitioner(s)

State Through Dindori Police Station.

Adv. App Valvi Rajendra B.

Respondent(s)

Ghanshyam Govardhan Chavan Advocate - Ghorpade Pradip S.

Hearing History

Judge: 2-CIVIL JUDGE J.D. AND JMFC DINDORI

10-03-2026

Disposed

07-02-2026

Evidence Part Heard

07-01-2026

Evidence Part Heard

08-12-2025

Evidence Part Heard

11-09-2025

Hearing

Final Orders / Judgements

10-03-2026
Copy of Judgment

Summary: The First Class Judicial Magistrate's Court at Dindori acquitted the accused, Dhanshyam Govardhan Chavan, on March 10, 2026, finding that the prosecution failed to prove the charges under Maharashtra Prohibition Act Section 65(E) beyond reasonable doubt. The court noted that while liquor bottles were seized from the accused's possession, the prosecution did not provide chemical analysis reports to conclusively establish the presence of alcohol, and the sole prosecution witness could not provide credible corroboration of the crime. Due to insufficient and unreliable evidence, the accused was declared not guilty and unconditionally discharged. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The First Class Judicial Magistrate's Court at Dindori acquitted the accused, Dhanshyam Govardhan Chavan, on March 10, 2026, finding that the prosecution failed to prove the charges under Maharashtra Prohibition Act Section 65(E) beyond reasonable doubt. The court noted that while liquor bottles were seized from the accused's possession, the prosecution did not provide chemical analysis reports to conclusively establish the presence of alcohol, and the sole prosecution witness could not provide credible corroboration of the crime. Due to insufficient and unreliable evidence, the accused was declared not guilty and unconditionally discharged. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

Civil and Criminal Court ,Dindori All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case