The State of Maharashtra vs Ganesh Raghunath Rege - deceased, etc. 8 Advocate - BHANAGE SHRIKRISHNA NARAYAN — 77/2018
Case under Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act Section 3(2)(C). Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 31st March 2026.
R.C.C. - Regular Criminal Case
CNR: MHSI050004592018
Filing Number
387/2018
Filing Date
07-09-2018
Registration No
77/2018
Registration Date
07-09-2018
Court
Civil Court Junior Division , Vengurla
Judge
1-Civil Judge J.D. and J.M.F.C. Vengurla
Decision Date
31st March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ACQUITTED
FIR Details
FIR Number
46
Police Station
Police Station Vengurle
Year
2017
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
The State of Maharashtra
Adv. A.P.P.
Respondent(s)
Ganesh Raghunath Rege - deceased, etc. 8 Advocate - BHANAGE SHRIKRISHNA NARAYAN
Baburao Anant Aarolkar
Adv. GODKAR NARAYAN JANARDAN
Balkrushna Govind Yesaji
Adv. GODKAR NARAYAN JANARDAN
Yashwant Bhiva Kambali
Adv. GODKAR NARAYAN JANARDAN
Subhash Bhiva Kambali
Adv. GODKAR NARAYAN JANARDAN
Vijay Bhalchandra Mestri
Adv. GODKAR NARAYAN JANARDAN
Subhash Pandurang Pednekar
Adv. GODKAR NARAYAN JANARDAN
Savalaram Gundu Kudav alis Aanand
Adv. GODKAR NARAYAN JANARDAN
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Civil Judge J.D. and J.M.F.C. Vengurla
Disposed
Judgment
Judgment
Arguments
Arguments
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 31-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 30-03-2026 | Judgment |
| 25-03-2026 | Judgment |
| 23-03-2026 | Arguments |
| 11-03-2026 | Arguments |
Interim Orders
The court (Vengurla Magistrate Court) examined a witness (Police Inspector Santosh Dattatram Gosavi) in case FIR 77/2018 regarding alleged damage to public property at a public toilet under the Public Property Damage Prevention Act, 1984. The witness testified about the scene inspection (panchnama) conducted on 02/04/2017, statements recorded from three witnesses on 03/04/2017, and the investigation leading to the chargesheet being filed against the accused. During cross-examination, the witness admitted significant gaps in the investigation, including failure to identify the actual property owner, lack of evidence linking the accused to the crime, and investigative irregularities, ultimately casting doubt on the reliability and thoroughness of the case. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The court (Vengurla Magistrate Court) examined a witness (Police Inspector Santosh Dattatram Gosavi) in case FIR 77/2018 regarding alleged damage to public property at a public toilet under the Public Property Damage Prevention Act, 1984. The witness testified about the scene inspection (panchnama) conducted on 02/04/2017, statements recorded from three witnesses on 03/04/2017, and the investigation leading to the chargesheet being filed against the accused. During cross-examination, the witness admitted significant gaps in the investigation, including failure to identify the actual property owner, lack of evidence linking the accused to the crime, and investigative irregularities, ultimately casting doubt on the reliability and thoroughness of the case. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts