STATE OF MAHARASHTRA through pali police station vs Asha Anant Pawar Advocate - AKSHARA MILIND DESHMUKH — 124/2024
Case under Maharashtra Prohibition Act Section 65(e). Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 10th March 2026.
S.C.C. - Summons/Summary Criminal Case
CNR: MHRG160002582024
e-Filing Number
18-12-2024
Filing Number
186/2024
Filing Date
20-12-2024
Registration No
124/2024
Registration Date
20-12-2024
Court
Civil and Criminal Court, Pali
Judge
1-Civil Judge J.D And J.M.F.C Pali-Sudhgad
Decision Date
10th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ACQUITTED
FIR Details
FIR Number
147
Police Station
Pali Police Station
Year
2024
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA through pali police station
Adv. Government pleader
Respondent(s)
Asha Anant Pawar Advocate - AKSHARA MILIND DESHMUKH
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Civil Judge J.D And J.M.F.C Pali-Sudhgad
Disposed
Arguments
Arguments
Arguments
Arguments
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 10-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 24-02-2026 | Arguments | |
| 21-02-2026 | Arguments | |
| 09-02-2026 | Arguments | |
| 02-02-2026 | Arguments |
Final Orders / Judgements
The court acquitted the accused Asha Anant Pawar of charges under the Maharashtra Prohibition Act, 1949, Section 65-E, finding insufficient evidence to prove that 20 liters of illicit liquor recovered from her possession was for sale. The court noted critical deficiencies in the prosecution's case, including inconsistencies in witness testimony regarding the actual seizure and the lack of independent corroboration of the alleged offense, leading to the defendant's acquittal under CrPC Section 255(1). This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The court acquitted the accused Asha Anant Pawar of charges under the Maharashtra Prohibition Act, 1949, Section 65-E, finding insufficient evidence to prove that 20 liters of illicit liquor recovered from her possession was for sale. The court noted critical deficiencies in the prosecution's case, including inconsistencies in witness testimony regarding the actual seizure and the lack of independent corroboration of the alleged offense, leading to the defendant's acquittal under CrPC Section 255(1). This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts