State of Maharashtra vs Tukaram Lakshman Aagre Advocate - Chavan Nilesh Kesari — 48/2020

Case under Maharashtra Prohibition Act Section 65E. Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 20th April 2026.

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

CNR: MHRT090001122020

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

93/2020

Filing Date

15-04-2020

Registration No

48/2020

Registration Date

15-04-2020

Court

Civil Judge Junior Division , Lanja

Judge

1-Civil JudgeJ.D. J.M.F.C LANJA

Decision Date

20th April 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ACQUITTED

FIR Details

FIR Number

99

Police Station

Lanja Police Station.

Year

2019

Acts & Sections

MAHARASHTRA PROHIBITION ACT Section 65E

Petitioner(s)

State of Maharashtra

Adv. Assistant Public Prosecutor

Respondent(s)

Tukaram Lakshman Aagre Advocate - Chavan Nilesh Kesari

Hearing History

Judge: 1-Civil JudgeJ.D. J.M.F.C LANJA

20-04-2026

Disposed

16-04-2026

Arguments

10-04-2026

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

04-04-2026

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

17-03-2026

Evidence Part Heard

Final Orders / Judgements

20-04-2026
Copy of Judgment

Summary The First Class Magistrate Court of Lanja acquitted 87-year-old Tukaram Lakshman Agre of charges under Section 65(E) of the Maharashtra Prohibition Act, 1949, for alleged illegal possession of country-made liquor. The court found that the prosecution failed to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt—crucially, the investigation report was not produced, the seizure panchnama lacked corroborating witnesses, and only one panchnama witness testified, whose credibility was undermined during cross-examination regarding procedural irregularities. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The First Class Magistrate Court of Lanja acquitted 87-year-old Tukaram Lakshman Agre of charges under Section 65(E) of the Maharashtra Prohibition Act, 1949, for alleged illegal possession of country-made liquor. The court found that the prosecution failed to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt—crucially, the investigation report was not produced, the seizure panchnama lacked corroborating witnesses, and only one panchnama witness testified, whose credibility was undermined during cross-examination regarding procedural irregularities. 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

Civil Judge Junior Division , Lanja All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case