State of Maharashtra vs Sanjay Sambhaji Ghalge — 541/2025
Case under Maharashtra Prohibition Act Section 65 E. Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 01st April 2026.
S.C.C. - Summons/Summary Criminal Case
CNR: MHSN090013082025
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
968/2025
Filing Date
17-11-2025
Registration No
541/2025
Registration Date
17-11-2025
Court
Civil Court Junior Division,Tasgaon
Judge
1-Civil Judge Jr.Dn. Tasgaon.
Decision Date
01st April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ACQUITTED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State of Maharashtra
Respondent(s)
Sanjay Sambhaji Ghalge
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Civil Judge Jr.Dn. Tasgaon.
Disposed
Evidence Part Heard
Hearing
Hearing
Hearing
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 01-04-2026 | Disposed | |
| 07-03-2026 | Evidence Part Heard | |
| 02-02-2026 | Hearing | |
| 26-12-2025 | Hearing | |
| 17-11-2025 | Hearing |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary State v. Sanjay Vishangi (Maharashtra Excise Act, 1949, Section 65(E)) The Civil Judge Junior Division at Tasgaon acquitted the accused Sanjay Vishangi on April 1, 2026. The prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused was illegally possessing 35 bottles of Royal brandy (180ml each) for sale, as the critical chemical examination report of the seized items was not properly submitted as evidence. Due to this evidentiary gap and lack of credible witness testimony, the court found reasonable doubt regarding the commission of the alleged offense and declared the accused not guilty. The court also cancelled his personal bond and ordered disposal of seized contraband after any appeals. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary State v. Sanjay Vishangi (Maharashtra Excise Act, 1949, Section 65(E)) The Civil Judge Junior Division at Tasgaon acquitted the accused Sanjay Vishangi on April 1, 2026. The prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused was illegally possessing 35 bottles of Royal brandy (180ml each) for sale, as the critical chemical examination report of the seized items was not properly submitted as evidence. Due to this evidentiary gap and lack of credible witness testimony, the court found reasonable doubt regarding the commission of the alleged offense and declared the accused not guilty. The court also cancelled his personal bond and ordered disposal of seized contraband after any appeals. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts