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.

Case disposed

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

CNR: MHRG160002582024

e-Filing Number

18-12-2024

Filing Number

186/2024

Filing Date

20-Dec-2024

Registration No

124/2024

Registration Date

20-Dec-2024

Court

Civil and Criminal Court, Pali

Judge

1-Civil Judge J.D And J.M.F.C Pali-Sudhgad

Decision Date

10-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ACQUITTED

Last updated 28-Apr-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

147

Police Station

Pali Police Station

Year

2024

Acts & Sections

Maharashtra Prohibition Act Section 65(e)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF MAHARASHTRA through pali police station

    Adv. Government pleader

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Asha Anant Pawar Advocate - AKSHARA MILIND DESHMUKH

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 10-Mar-2026

    Copy of JudgmentView PDF

    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.

  3. 10-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Civil Judge J.D And J.M.F.C Pali-Sudhgad

  4. 24-Feb-2026

    Arguments

    Civil Judge J.D And J.M.F.C Pali-Sudhgad

  5. 21-Feb-2026

    Arguments

    Civil Judge J.D And J.M.F.C Pali-Sudhgad

  6. 09-Feb-2026

    Arguments

    Civil Judge J.D And J.M.F.C Pali-Sudhgad

  7. 02-Feb-2026

    Arguments

    Civil Judge J.D And J.M.F.C Pali-Sudhgad

  8. 23-Jan-2026

    Statement U/sec.313 Cr.P.C.

    Civil Judge J.D And J.M.F.C Pali-Sudhgad

  9. 19-Jan-2026

    Statement U/sec.313 Cr.P.C.

    Civil Judge J.D And J.M.F.C Pali-Sudhgad

  10. 22-Dec-2025

    Evidence Part Heard

    Civil Judge J.D And J.M.F.C Pali-Sudhgad

  11. 04-Dec-2025

    Evidence Part Heard

    Civil Judge J.D And J.M.F.C Pali-Sudhgad

  12. 20-Nov-2025

    Evidence Part Heard

    Civil Judge J.D And J.M.F.C Pali-Sudhgad

  13. 27-Oct-2025

    Evidence Part Heard

    Civil Judge J.D And J.M.F.C Pali-Sudhgad

  14. 25-Sep-2025

    Evidence Part Heard

    Civil Judge J.D And J.M.F.C Pali-Sudhgad

  15. 25-Aug-2025

    Evidence Part Heard

    Civil Judge J.D And J.M.F.C Pali-Sudhgad

  16. 12-Aug-2025

    Evidence Part Heard

    Civil Judge J.D And J.M.F.C Pali-Sudhgad

  17. 29-Jul-2025

    Evidence Part Heard

    Civil Judge J.D And J.M.F.C Pali-Sudhgad

  18. 14-Jul-2025

    Evidence Part Heard

    Civil Judge J.D And J.M.F.C Pali-Sudhgad

  19. 27-Jun-2025

    Evidence Part Heard

    Civil Judge J.D And J.M.F.C Pali-Sudhgad

  20. 11-Jun-2025

    Evidence Part Heard

    Civil Judge J.D And J.M.F.C Pali-Sudhgad

  21. 28-May-2025

    Evidence Part Heard

    Civil Judge J.D And J.M.F.C Pali-Sudhgad

  22. 07-May-2025

    Evidence Part Heard

    Civil Judge J.D And J.M.F.C Pali-Sudhgad

  23. 15-Apr-2025

    Evidence Part Heard

    Civil Judge J.D And J.M.F.C Pali-Sudhgad

  24. 25-Feb-2025

    Hearing

    Civil Judge J.D And J.M.F.C Pali-Sudhgad

  25. 03-Feb-2025

    Hearing

    Civil Judge J.D And J.M.F.C Pali-Sudhgad

  26. 20-Dec-2024

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  27. 20-Dec-2024

    Case filed

    Registration No. 124/2024

casestatus.in Summary

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.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case