Satana Police Station vs Yashoda Ramkrushna Mali Advocate - Sonawane Sanjay R — 469/2024
Case under Maharashtra Prohibition Act Section 65(E). Disposed: Uncontested--U/SEC. 258 OF CR.PC on 10th March 2026.
S.C.C. - Summons/Summary Criminal Case
CNR: MHNS240013272024
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
971/2024
Filing Date
10-07-2024
Registration No
469/2024
Registration Date
10-07-2024
Court
Civil and Criminal Court ,Satana
Judge
1-CIVIL JUDGE J.D. AND JMFC SATANA
Decision Date
10th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--U/SEC. 258 OF CR.PC
FIR Details
FIR Number
46
Police Station
SATANA POLICE STATION
Year
2024
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Satana Police Station
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
Yashoda Ramkrushna Mali Advocate - Sonawane Sanjay R
Hearing History
Judge: 1-CIVIL JUDGE J.D. AND JMFC SATANA
Disposed
Plea / Particulars
Filing of Surety
Filing of Surety
Filing of Surety
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 10-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 09-12-2025 | Plea / Particulars | |
| 12-09-2025 | Filing of Surety | |
| 21-08-2025 | Filing of Surety | |
| 22-05-2025 | Filing of Surety |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary: The court acquitted the accused Yashoda Ramakrishna Mali of charges under the Maharashtra Prohibition Act, 1949, Section 65(E), citing that the prosecution failed to produce chemical examination reports necessary to prove the offense despite having opportunities since the case filing date of 10/07/2024. The court found that the prolonged absence of the accused and missing critical evidence rendered further proceedings wasteful of judicial time, warranting dismissal of the case under CrPC Section 258. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: The court acquitted the accused Yashoda Ramakrishna Mali of charges under the Maharashtra Prohibition Act, 1949, Section 65(E), citing that the prosecution failed to produce chemical examination reports necessary to prove the offense despite having opportunities since the case filing date of 10/07/2024. The court found that the prolonged absence of the accused and missing critical evidence rendered further proceedings wasteful of judicial time, warranting dismissal of the case under CrPC Section 258. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts