State of Maharashtra vs Ramchandra Balu Hirve Advocate - Thakare Shankesh Rajesh — 154/2025
Case under Maharashtra Prohibition Act Section 65(e)(a). Disposed: Uncontested--U/SEC. 258 OF CR.PC on 12th March 2026.
S.C.C. - Summons/Summary Criminal Case
CNR: MHRG070004632025
Filing Number
337/2025
Filing Date
03-04-2025
Registration No
154/2025
Registration Date
03-04-2025
Court
Civil Judge J.D. and J.M.F.C. Karjat
Judge
2-CIVIL JUDGE J.D. J.M.F.C. KARJAT
Decision Date
12th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--U/SEC. 258 OF CR.PC
FIR Details
FIR Number
8
Police Station
Karjat Police Station
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State of Maharashtra
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
Ramchandra Balu Hirve Advocate - Thakare Shankesh Rajesh
Hearing History
Judge: 2-CIVIL JUDGE J.D. J.M.F.C. KARJAT
Disposed
Plea / Particulars
Plea / Particulars
Plea / Particulars
Plea / Particulars
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 12-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 20-01-2026 | Plea / Particulars |
| 06-11-2025 | Plea / Particulars |
| 22-09-2025 | Plea / Particulars |
| 24-06-2025 | Plea / Particulars |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case 154/2025 Summary: The Judicial Magistrate of Karjat stopped criminal proceedings against the accused under Section 258 CrPC, finding that prescribed procedures for raid, seizure of property, and chemical analysis sampling were not followed during investigation. The court discharged the accused, cancelled the bail bond, and disposed of the seized property, concluding that proceeding further would serve no purpose as the prosecution's case was procedurally compromised. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case 154/2025 Summary: The Judicial Magistrate of Karjat stopped criminal proceedings against the accused under Section 258 CrPC, finding that prescribed procedures for raid, seizure of property, and chemical analysis sampling were not followed during investigation. The court discharged the accused, cancelled the bail bond, and disposed of the seized property, concluding that proceeding further would serve no purpose as the prosecution's case was procedurally compromised. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts