State Excise Deparment Mahad vs Sanghavi Sandesh Polekar — 180/2025
Case under Maharashtra Prohibition Act Section 65(B,K,E,F). Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 12th March 2026.
S.C.C. - Summons/Summary Criminal Case
CNR: MHRG130002952025
Filing Number
248/2025
Filing Date
12-06-2025
Registration No
180/2025
Registration Date
12-06-2025
Court
Civil Judge, J.D. and J.M.F.C.Shriwardhan
Judge
1-CIVIL JUDGE J D AND J M F C SHRIWARDHAN
Decision Date
12th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ACQUITTED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State Excise Deparment Mahad
Adv. App
Respondent(s)
Sanghavi Sandesh Polekar
Hearing History
Judge: 1-CIVIL JUDGE J D AND J M F C SHRIWARDHAN
Disposed
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 12-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 16-02-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
| 20-12-2025 | Evidence |
| 11-11-2025 | Evidence |
| 26-09-2025 | Evidence |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: State Excise Department Mahad v. Sanghavi Sandesh Polekar (180/2025) The court acquitted the respondent Sanghavi Sandesh Polekar of charges under Maharashtra Excise Act 1949, Section 65(E)(F) for alleged unauthorized possession and sale of illicit liquor manufacturing chemicals. The prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, as the key prosecution witnesses denied the seizure and provided no chemical analysis report to establish that the seized liquid was actually illicit liquor-making material. Consequently, the court discharged the accused, cancelled his bail bond, and ordered forfeiture of the seized materials to the Excise Department. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: State Excise Department Mahad v. Sanghavi Sandesh Polekar (180/2025) The court acquitted the respondent Sanghavi Sandesh Polekar of charges under Maharashtra Excise Act 1949, Section 65(E)(F) for alleged unauthorized possession and sale of illicit liquor manufacturing chemicals. The prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, as the key prosecution witnesses denied the seizure and provided no chemical analysis report to establish that the seized liquid was actually illicit liquor-making material. Consequently, the court discharged the accused, cancelled his bail bond, and ordered forfeiture of the seized materials to the Excise Department. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts