State of Maharashtra through Mandangad Police Station vs Iqbal Umar Mukadam Advocate - Mehta Vikas Chandrakant — 35/2022

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 353,. Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 23rd March 2026.

Sessions Case

CNR: MHRT040003502022

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

170/2022

Filing Date

01-10-2022

Registration No

35/2022

Registration Date

01-10-2022

Court

District Judge-1 and Additional Sessions Judge, Khed.

Judge

3-District Judge-2 and Addl. Sessions Judge Khed.

Decision Date

23rd March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ACQUITTED

FIR Details

FIR Number

29

Police Station

Police Station Mandangad

Year

2020

Acts & Sections

INDIAN PENAL CODE Section 353,
Bombay Police Act Section 110/117

Petitioner(s)

State of Maharashtra through Mandangad Police Station

Adv. Assistant Public Prosecutor

Respondent(s)

Iqbal Umar Mukadam Advocate - Mehta Vikas Chandrakant

Hearing History

Judge: 3-District Judge-2 and Addl. Sessions Judge Khed.

23-03-2026

Disposed

10-03-2026

Judgment

09-03-2026

Arguments

17-02-2026

Arguments

10-02-2026

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

Final Orders / Judgements

23-03-2026
Copy of Judgment

The Additional Sessions Judge at Khed, Maharashtra acquitted accused Iqbal Umar Mukadam of charges under Section 353 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 110 read with Section 117 of the Maharashtra Police Act, finding insufficient evidence that mere verbal statements without accompanying physical assault or gesture constitute obstruction of a public servant's duties. The court noted critical gaps in the prosecution's case, including lack of documentary evidence that the forest office was functioning at the alleged location during official hours, and inconsistencies between the FIR and witness testimony. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

The Additional Sessions Judge at Khed, Maharashtra acquitted accused Iqbal Umar Mukadam of charges under Section 353 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 110 read with Section 117 of the Maharashtra Police Act, finding insufficient evidence that mere verbal statements without accompanying physical assault or gesture constitute obstruction of a public servant's duties. The court noted critical gaps in the prosecution's case, including lack of documentary evidence that the forest office was functioning at the alleged location during official hours, and inconsistencies between the FIR and witness testimony. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

District Judge-1 and Additional Sessions Judge, Khed. All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case