State of Maharashtra vs Ashok Mahadev Bothare Advocate - None — 405/2022
Case under Maharashtra Prohibition Act Section 65(E). Disposed: Uncontested--U/SEC. 258 OF CR.PC on 10th March 2026.
S.C.C. - Summons/Summary Criminal Case
CNR: MHRT050007532022
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
618/2022
Filing Date
26-07-2022
Registration No
405/2022
Registration Date
26-07-2022
Court
Civil Judge, Junior Division, Khed
Judge
3-2nd Jt. Civil Judge, Junior Division and JMFC, Khed
Decision Date
10th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--U/SEC. 258 OF CR.PC
FIR Details
FIR Number
69
Police Station
State Excise, Khed.
Year
2022
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State of Maharashtra
Adv. Assistant Public Prosecutor
Respondent(s)
Ashok Mahadev Bothare Advocate - None
Hearing History
Judge: 3-2nd Jt. Civil Judge, Junior Division and JMFC, Khed
Disposed
Awaiting Summons
Awaiting Summons
Awaiting Summons
Awaiting Summons
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 10-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 05-01-2026 | Awaiting Summons | |
| 08-10-2025 | Awaiting Summons | |
| 22-07-2025 | Awaiting Summons | |
| 16-06-2025 | Awaiting Summons |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary: The Maharashtra court stopped proceedings against Ashok Mahadev Bothare under Section 65(e) of the Maharashtra Prohibition Act, 1949 (illicit liquor possession) and released the accused under Section 258 of the CrPC. The court found that the prosecution's failure to produce the chemical analysis report—vital evidence to prove the seized substance was prohibited liquor—made it impossible to establish the offense's essential ingredients, rendering continued proceedings futile. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: The Maharashtra court stopped proceedings against Ashok Mahadev Bothare under Section 65(e) of the Maharashtra Prohibition Act, 1949 (illicit liquor possession) and released the accused under Section 258 of the CrPC. The court found that the prosecution's failure to produce the chemical analysis report—vital evidence to prove the seized substance was prohibited liquor—made it impossible to establish the offense's essential ingredients, rendering continued proceedings futile. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts