State vs Kalpana Raju Pawar — 119/2025

Case under Maharashtra Prohibition Act Section 65E. Disposed: Uncontested--U/SEC. 258 OF CR.PC on 09th March 2026.

Case disposed

S.C.C. - Summons/Summary Criminal Case

CNR: MHRG060002522025

Filing Number

179/2025

Filing Date

18-Mar-2025

Registration No

119/2025

Registration Date

20-Mar-2025

Court

Civil Judge J.D. and J.M.F.C., Pen

Judge

2-Civil Judge Jd and JMFC Pen

Decision Date

09-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--U/SEC. 258 OF CR.PC

Last updated 13-Apr-2026

Acts & Sections

Maharashtra Prohibition Act Section 65E

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.State

    Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Kalpana Raju Pawar

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 09-Mar-2026

    Order on ExhibitView PDF

    The court discharged accused Kalpana Pawar and stopped proceedings under Section 258 of the CrPC in a Maharashtra Prohibition Act case, citing the prosecution's failure to produce the chemical analysis report despite one year passing and sufficient opportunity given. The seized property will be disposed of per law, while police records are retained for potential case reopening. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 09-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Civil Judge Jd and JMFC Pen

  4. 20-Jan-2026

    Filing of Surety

    Civil Judge Jd and JMFC Pen

  5. 11-Nov-2025

    Filing of Surety

    Civil Judge Jd and JMFC Pen

  6. 09-Sep-2025

    Filing of Surety

    Civil Judge Jd and JMFC Pen

  7. 02-Jul-2025

    Filing of Surety

    Civil Judge Jd and JMFC Pen

  8. 03-Apr-2025

    Awaiting Summons

    Civil Judge Jd and JMFC Pen

  9. 22-Mar-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  10. 18-Mar-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. 119/2025

casestatus.in Summary

The court discharged accused Kalpana Pawar and stopped proceedings under Section 258 of the CrPC in a Maharashtra Prohibition Act case, citing the prosecution's failure to produce the chemical analysis report despite one year passing and sufficient opportunity given. The seized property will be disposed of per law, while police records are retained for potential case reopening. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case