State of Maharashtra vs Pratik Dattatrey Jadhav — 78/2024
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 353,34. Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 01st April 2026.
Sessions Case
CNR: MHRG170015872024
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
1061/2024
Filing Date
02-08-2024
Registration No
78/2024
Registration Date
02-08-2024
Court
District and Addl. Sessions Judge, Panvel, Dist., Raigad
Judge
6-District Judge 4 and Addl.Session Judge, Panvel-Raigad
Decision Date
01st April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ACQUITTED
FIR Details
FIR Number
289
Police Station
Panvel CityTown Police Station
Year
2023
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State of Maharashtra
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
Pratik Dattatrey Jadhav
Suvarna Dattatrey Jadhav
Hearing History
Judge: 6-District Judge 4 and Addl.Session Judge, Panvel-Raigad
Disposed
Arguments
Arguments
Arguments
Arguments
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 01-04-2026 | Disposed | |
| 18-03-2026 | Arguments | |
| 13-03-2026 | Arguments | |
| 11-03-2026 | Arguments | |
| 10-03-2026 | Arguments |
Final Orders / Judgements
Court Decision Summary The Additional Sessions Court, Panvel (Raigad) acquitted both accused persons—Pratiyek Dattattray Jadhav (29) and Suvarna Dattattray Jadhav (47)—of charges under IPC Sections 353 and 34 on April 1, 2026. The court found that the prosecution failed to establish beyond reasonable doubt that the accused obstructed a police officer and complainant from performing their official duties, citing insufficient and inconsistent witness testimonies, unverified video evidence, and lack of credible identification of the accused. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Court Decision Summary The Additional Sessions Court, Panvel (Raigad) acquitted both accused persons—Pratiyek Dattattray Jadhav (29) and Suvarna Dattattray Jadhav (47)—of charges under IPC Sections 353 and 34 on April 1, 2026. The court found that the prosecution failed to establish beyond reasonable doubt that the accused obstructed a police officer and complainant from performing their official duties, citing insufficient and inconsistent witness testimonies, unverified video evidence, and lack of credible identification of the accused. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts