Sheshrao Baburao Suryawanshi, Asst.Police commisioner Panvel vs Mahesh Ratan Baladi Advocate - Bangera A.S. — 83/2020

Case under Environment (protection) Act Section 15. Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 02nd April 2026.

R.C.C. - Regular Criminal Case

CNR: MHRG030000862020

Case disposed

Filing Number

81/2020

Filing Date

01-10-2020

Registration No

83/2020

Registration Date

01-10-2020

Court

Chief Judicial Magistrate , Raigarh

Judge

1-Chief Judicial Magistrate Raigad-ALIBAG

Decision Date

02nd April 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ACQUITTED

Acts & Sections

ENVIRONMENT (PROTECTION) ACT Section 15
Noise Pollution Regulation and Control Act, 2000 Section 19

Petitioner(s)

Sheshrao Baburao Suryawanshi, Asst.Police commisioner Panvel

Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

Mahesh Ratan Baladi Advocate - Bangera A.S.

Hearing History

Judge: 1-Chief Judicial Magistrate Raigad-ALIBAG

02-04-2026

Disposed

23-03-2026

Judgment

16-03-2026

Judgment

12-03-2026

Judgment

05-03-2026

Judgment

Final Orders / Judgements

02-04-2026
Copy of Judgment

The Chief Judicial Magistrate acquitted Mahesh Ratan Baldi of noise pollution charges under the Environment Protection Act, 1986, finding the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. Key deficiencies included unreliable electronic evidence lacking mandatory Section 65-B certification, technical issues with sound-measuring device calibration, unsigned reports, failure to corroborate with independent panch witnesses, inability to establish direct nexus to the accused's mandal amid multiple simultaneous processions, and absence of material evidence like seized instruments. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Interim Orders

09-10-2025
Evidence
10-11-2025
Evidence
05-01-2026
Evidence
casestatus.in Summary

The Chief Judicial Magistrate acquitted Mahesh Ratan Baldi of noise pollution charges under the Environment Protection Act, 1986, finding the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. Key deficiencies included unreliable electronic evidence lacking mandatory Section 65-B certification, technical issues with sound-measuring device calibration, unsigned reports, failure to corroborate with independent panch witnesses, inability to establish direct nexus to the accused's mandal amid multiple simultaneous processions, and absence of material evidence like seized instruments. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

Chief Judicial Magistrate , Raigarh All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case