The State of Maharashtra Through Malvan Police Station vs Pawan Namdev Kusale Advocate - PAI SWAROOP NARAYAN — 79/2021
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 379. Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 08th May 2026.
R.C.C. - Regular Criminal Case
CNR: MHSI070004162021
Filing Number
322/2021
Filing Date
08-09-2021
Registration No
79/2021
Registration Date
08-09-2021
Court
Civil Court Junior Division , Malvan
Judge
1-Civil Judge J.D. J.M.F.C. Malvan
Decision Date
08th May 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ACQUITTED
FIR Details
FIR Number
38
Police Station
Police Station Malvan
Year
2021
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
The State of Maharashtra Through Malvan Police Station
Adv. A.P.P.
Respondent(s)
Pawan Namdev Kusale Advocate - PAI SWAROOP NARAYAN
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Civil Judge J.D. J.M.F.C. Malvan
Disposed
Judgment
Arguments
Statement U/sec.313 Cr.P.C.
Statement U/sec.313 Cr.P.C.
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 08-05-2026 | Disposed |
| 13-04-2026 | Judgment |
| 02-04-2026 | Arguments |
| 11-03-2026 | Statement U/sec.313 Cr.P.C. |
| 07-03-2026 | Statement U/sec.313 Cr.P.C. |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The court acquitted the accused, Pavan Namdev Kusale, of charges under Indian Penal Code Section 379 (theft) in a mobile phone theft case. The court found that the prosecution failed to prove that the seized Samsung mobile (Model A-70) was the same device allegedly stolen, as no identification evidence was presented before the court, and the statutory presumption under Section 114(a) of the Indian Evidence Act could not apply without establishing the recovered mobile was the stolen one. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The court acquitted the accused, Pavan Namdev Kusale, of charges under Indian Penal Code Section 379 (theft) in a mobile phone theft case. The court found that the prosecution failed to prove that the seized Samsung mobile (Model A-70) was the same device allegedly stolen, as no identification evidence was presented before the court, and the statutory presumption under Section 114(a) of the Indian Evidence Act could not apply without establishing the recovered mobile was the stolen one. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts