State of Maharashtra Excise Department vs Lahu Dagadu Kamble — 369/2025
Case under Maharashtra Prohibition Act Section 65(e). Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 27th March 2026.
S.C.C. - Summons/Summary Criminal Case
CNR: MHSN120006952025
Filing Number
536/2025
Filing Date
11-08-2025
Registration No
369/2025
Registration Date
11-08-2025
Court
Civil Court Junior Division, Palus
Judge
1-CIVIL JUDGE JR. DN. J.M.F.C, Palus
Decision Date
27th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ACQUITTED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State of Maharashtra Excise Department
Adv. Patil Suvarna Vilas
Respondent(s)
Lahu Dagadu Kamble
Hearing History
Judge: 1-CIVIL JUDGE JR. DN. J.M.F.C, Palus
Disposed
Arguments
Hearing
Hearing
Hearing
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 27-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 07-03-2026 | Arguments |
| 03-02-2026 | Hearing |
| 28-11-2025 | Hearing |
| 10-11-2025 | Hearing |
Final Orders / Judgements
Court Decision Summary The Judicial Magistrate First Class, Palus acquitted defendant Lahu Dargud Kamble of charges under Maharashtra Prohibition Act Section 65(E) for allegedly possessing 27 bottles of illicit alcohol for sale. The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt—the panchnama (seizure record) was not properly conducted before the mandated witness, and no credible testimonial evidence supported the allegations. The court applied the benefit of doubt principle, acquitting the defendant and ordering return of seized assets after appeal period. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Court Decision Summary The Judicial Magistrate First Class, Palus acquitted defendant Lahu Dargud Kamble of charges under Maharashtra Prohibition Act Section 65(E) for allegedly possessing 27 bottles of illicit alcohol for sale. The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt—the panchnama (seizure record) was not properly conducted before the mandated witness, and no credible testimonial evidence supported the allegations. The court applied the benefit of doubt principle, acquitting the defendant and ordering return of seized assets after appeal period. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts