State of Maharashtra vs Nilesh Balu Ahire Advocate - Shri.P.M.Sansare — 98/2020
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 380,34. Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 10th March 2026.
R.C.C. - Regular Criminal Case
CNR: MHNS210011612020
Filing Number
1159/2020
Filing Date
29-Dec-2020
Registration No
98/2020
Registration Date
29-Dec-2020
Court
Civil and Criminal Court ,Manmad
Judge
1-CIVIL Judge J.D. J.m.f.c.manmad City
Decision Date
10-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ACQUITTED
Last updated 29-Apr-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
1048
Police Station
MANMAD CITY POLICE STATION
Year
2020
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.State of Maharashtra
Adv. APP Shri.A.S.Patil
Respondent(s)
-
1.Nilesh Balu Ahire Advocate - Shri.P.M.Sansare
-
2.Uday Chandrakant Salunke
-
3.Pravin Balu Ahire
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
10-Mar-2026
Copy of JudgmentView PDF
The court acquitted all three accused persons of charges under IPC Sections 380 and 34 (theft), finding that the prosecution failed to establish the guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The court noted that the prosecution's key witness testimony was unreliable, the first informant's account lacked credibility, and the circumstantial evidence was insufficient to prove the alleged theft of government property from a BSNL company depot. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
10-Mar-2026
Disposed
CIVIL Judge J.D. J.m.f.c.manmad City
-
23-Feb-2026
Arguments
CIVIL Judge J.D. J.m.f.c.manmad City
-
20-Feb-2026
Arguments
CIVIL Judge J.D. J.m.f.c.manmad City
-
20-Jan-2026
Evidence Part Heard
CIVIL Judge J.D. J.m.f.c.manmad City
-
16-Dec-2025
Evidence Part Heard
CIVIL Judge J.D. J.m.f.c.manmad City
-
06-Oct-2025
Evidence Part Heard
CIVIL Judge J.D. J.m.f.c.manmad City
-
05-Aug-2025
Evidence Part Heard
CIVIL Judge J.D. J.m.f.c.manmad City
-
13-May-2025
Evidence Part Heard
CIVIL Judge J.D. J.m.f.c.manmad City
-
13-Mar-2025
Evidence Part Heard
CIVIL Judge J.D. J.m.f.c.manmad City
-
03-Feb-2025
Evidence Part Heard
CIVIL Judge J.D. J.m.f.c.manmad City
-
31-Dec-2024
Evidence Part Heard
CIVIL Judge J.D. J.m.f.c.manmad City
-
30-Nov-2024
Evidence Part Heard
CIVIL Judge J.D. J.m.f.c.manmad City
-
01-Oct-2024
Evidence Part Heard
CIVIL Judge J.D. J.m.f.c.manmad City
-
10-Sep-2024
Evidence Part Heard
CIVIL Judge J.D. J.m.f.c.manmad City
-
21-Aug-2024
Evidence Part Heard
CIVIL Judge J.D. J.m.f.c.manmad City
-
26-Jul-2024
Evidence Part Heard
CIVIL Judge J.D. J.m.f.c.manmad City
-
11-Jul-2024
Evidence Part Heard
CIVIL Judge J.D. J.m.f.c.manmad City
-
27-Jun-2024
Evidence Part Heard
CIVIL Judge J.D. J.m.f.c.manmad City
-
29-May-2024
Hearing
CIVIL Judge J.D. J.m.f.c.manmad City
-
18-Apr-2024
Hearing
CIVIL Judge J.D. J.m.f.c.manmad City
-
06-Mar-2024
Hearing
CIVIL Judge J.D. J.m.f.c.manmad City
-
20-Jan-2024
Hearing
CIVIL Judge J.D. J.m.f.c.manmad City
-
05-Dec-2023
Hearing
CIVIL Judge J.D. J.m.f.c.manmad City
-
25-Oct-2023
Hearing
CIVIL Judge J.D. J.m.f.c.manmad City
-
15-Sep-2023
Hearing
CIVIL Judge J.D. J.m.f.c.manmad City
-
06-Jul-2023
Hearing
CIVIL Judge J.D. J.m.f.c.manmad City
-
06-May-2023
Charge
CIVIL Judge J.D. J.m.f.c.manmad City
-
04-Feb-2023
Charge
CIVIL Judge J.D. J.m.f.c.manmad City
-
24-Nov-2022
Awaiting Summons
CIVIL Judge J.D. J.m.f.c.manmad City
-
11-Aug-2022
Awaiting Summons
CIVIL Judge J.D. J.m.f.c.manmad City
-
09-Jun-2022
Awaiting Summons
CIVIL Judge J.D. J.m.f.c.manmad City
-
16-Feb-2022
Awaiting Summons
CIVIL Judge J.D. J.m.f.c.manmad City
-
29-Nov-2021
Awaiting Summons
CIVIL Judge J.D. J.m.f.c.manmad City
-
25-Jun-2021
Awaiting Summons
CIVIL Judge J.D. J.m.f.c.manmad City
-
05-Apr-2021
Awaiting Summons
CIVIL Judge J.D. J.m.f.c.manmad City
-
29-Dec-2020
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
29-Dec-2020
Case filed
Registration No. 98/2020
The court acquitted all three accused persons of charges under IPC Sections 380 and 34 (theft), finding that the prosecution failed to establish the guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The court noted that the prosecution's key witness testimony was unreliable, the first informant's account lacked credibility, and the circumstantial evidence was insufficient to prove the alleged theft of government property from a BSNL company depot. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts