State of Maharashtra vs Ashish Nandkumar Talekar Advocate - Bangera A.S. — 37/2021
Case under Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act Section 8(c),20(B). Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 17th March 2026.
Spl.Case - Special Case (Sessions)
CNR: MHRG010004602021
Filing Number
155/2021
Filing Date
27-04-2021
Registration No
37/2021
Registration Date
30-04-2021
Court
District and Session Court Raigad
Judge
1-Principal District Sesssions Judge
Decision Date
17th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ACQUITTED
FIR Details
FIR Number
15
Police Station
Revdanda police station
Year
2021
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State of Maharashtra
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
Ashish Nandkumar Talekar Advocate - Bangera A.S.
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Principal District Sesssions Judge
Disposed
Judgment
Statement U/sec.313 Cr.P.C.
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 17-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 16-03-2026 | Judgment |
| 12-03-2026 | Statement U/sec.313 Cr.P.C. |
| 28-02-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
| 26-02-2026 | Evidence |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: State of Maharashtra v. Ashish Nandkumar Talekar (37/2021) Decision: Accused Ashish Nandkumar Talekar was acquitted of charges under sections 8(c) and 20(b) of the NDPS Act, 1985, for possession of 8.4 kg ganja. The court found critical procedural violations including non-compliance with mandatory sections 50, 52A, and 57 of the NDPS Act—specifically, only partial compliance with Section 50 (informing accused of search rights), failure to prepare inventory before a magistrate, improper sample collection at seizure site rather than before magistrate, and no report filed to superior within 48 hours. The court held that such violations created reasonable doubt, rendering the chemical analysis report unreliable. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: State of Maharashtra v. Ashish Nandkumar Talekar (37/2021) Decision: Accused Ashish Nandkumar Talekar was acquitted of charges under sections 8(c) and 20(b) of the NDPS Act, 1985, for possession of 8.4 kg ganja. The court found critical procedural violations including non-compliance with mandatory sections 50, 52A, and 57 of the NDPS Act—specifically, only partial compliance with Section 50 (informing accused of search rights), failure to prepare inventory before a magistrate, improper sample collection at seizure site rather than before magistrate, and no report filed to superior within 48 hours. The court held that such violations created reasonable doubt, rendering the chemical analysis report unreliable. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts