State of Maharashtra vs Laxman Lahu Aawate — 19/2024
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 376,376(2)(n). Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 24th April 2026.
Spl.Case - Special Case (Sessions)
CNR: MHRG010007752024
Filing Number
198/2024
Filing Date
09-07-2024
Registration No
19/2024
Registration Date
09-07-2024
Court
District and Session Court Raigad
Judge
17-DISTRICT JUDGE-1 ADDL.SESSIONS JUDGE
Decision Date
24th April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ACQUITTED
FIR Details
FIR Number
161
Police Station
Pen Police Station
Year
2024
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State of Maharashtra
Adv. App
Respondent(s)
Laxman Lahu Aawate
Hearing History
Judge: 17-DISTRICT JUDGE-1 ADDL.SESSIONS JUDGE
Disposed
Arguments
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 24-04-2026 | Disposed |
| 23-04-2026 | Arguments |
| 21-04-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
| 08-04-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
| 23-03-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: State of Maharashtra v. Laxman Lahu Aavate (Case 19/2024) Court Decision: Laxman Lahu Aavate was acquitted of all charges under IPC Section 376(2)(n) (rape of a minor) and POCSO Act Sections 4(2) and 12. Key Reasoning: The court found that the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. Despite the victim being 14 years old and allegedly pregnant, key prosecution witnesses—including the victim and her parents—testified they had a consensual love relationship with intent to marry, not sexual abuse. Crucially, medical doctors who could verify pregnancy were never examined, and the victim never testified to non-consensual physical intimacy. The court concluded insufficient evidence existed to establish the accused knowingly committed sexual intercourse with a minor. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: State of Maharashtra v. Laxman Lahu Aavate (Case 19/2024) Court Decision: Laxman Lahu Aavate was acquitted of all charges under IPC Section 376(2)(n) (rape of a minor) and POCSO Act Sections 4(2) and 12. Key Reasoning: The court found that the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. Despite the victim being 14 years old and allegedly pregnant, key prosecution witnesses—including the victim and her parents—testified they had a consensual love relationship with intent to marry, not sexual abuse. Crucially, medical doctors who could verify pregnancy were never examined, and the victim never testified to non-consensual physical intimacy. The court concluded insufficient evidence existed to establish the accused knowingly committed sexual intercourse with a minor. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts