State of Maharashtra Through Deorukh Police Station vs Sanjay Gangaram Parsharam Advocate - Shinde Rajesh Kashiram — 124/2025
Case under Maharashtra Prohibition Act Section 65(e). Status: Evidence Part Heard. Next hearing: 15th May 2026.
S.C.C. - Summons/Summary Criminal Case
CNR: MHRT080003052025
Next Hearing
15th May 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
236/2025
Filing Date
03-07-2025
Registration No
124/2025
Registration Date
03-07-2025
Court
Civil Judge Junior Division , Deorukh
Judge
1-Civil Judge J.D. J.M.F.C. Deorukh
FIR Details
FIR Number
65
Police Station
Deorukh Police Station
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State of Maharashtra Through Deorukh Police Station
Adv. Assistant Public Prosecutor
Respondent(s)
Sanjay Gangaram Parsharam Advocate - Shinde Rajesh Kashiram
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Civil Judge J.D. J.M.F.C. Deorukh
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
Hearing
List of Witness
Awaiting Summons
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 10-03-2026 | Evidence Part Heard | |
| 30-12-2025 | Evidence Part Heard | |
| 04-11-2025 | Hearing | |
| 03-09-2025 | List of Witness | |
| 03-07-2025 | Awaiting Summons |
Interim Orders
This is a court record documenting witness examination in a criminal case (FIR No. 124/2025) before the Civil Judge at Deorukh, Ratnagiri. The prosecution witness (Shantaram Sitaram Shinde) gave contradictory testimony regarding a liquor seizure, denying knowledge of the panchnama contents and claiming he did not witness the alleged recovery, leading the judge to permit cross-examination by the defense. The hearing concluded with the witness statement recorded and the case status pending further proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
This is a court record documenting witness examination in a criminal case (FIR No. 124/2025) before the Civil Judge at Deorukh, Ratnagiri. The prosecution witness (Shantaram Sitaram Shinde) gave contradictory testimony regarding a liquor seizure, denying knowledge of the panchnama contents and claiming he did not witness the alleged recovery, leading the judge to permit cross-examination by the defense. The hearing concluded with the witness statement recorded and the case status pending further proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts