State of Maharashtra Excis Departmen vs Lahu Dagadu Kamble — 599/2025

Case under Maharashtra Prohibition Act Section 65(e). Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 27th March 2026.

Case disposed

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

CNR: MHSN120010562025

Filing Number

840/2025

Filing Date

10-Dec-2025

Registration No

599/2025

Registration Date

10-Dec-2025

Court

Civil Court Junior Division, Palus

Judge

1-CIVIL Judge Jr. Dn. J.m.f.c, Palus

Decision Date

27-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ACQUITTED

Last updated 05-Apr-2026

Acts & Sections

Maharashtra Prohibition Act Section 65(e)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.State of Maharashtra Excis Departmen

    Adv. Changan Ravindra Ramdas

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Lahu Dagadu Kamble

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 27-Mar-2026

    Copy of JudgmentView PDF

    The court acquitted the defendant, Lahu Dargud Kamble, of charges under the Maharashtra Prohibition Act, Section 65(E), finding insufficient evidence to prove beyond reasonable doubt that he was illegally possessing and selling country liquor. The court noted critical procedural lapses including the absence of proper panchnama (seizure documentation) and lack of credible witness testimony, leading to reasonable doubt about the seizure itself. The defendant was ordered to be released, with seized liquor bottles to be disposed of through proper channels. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 27-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    CIVIL Judge Jr. Dn. J.m.f.c, Palus

  4. 07-Mar-2026

    Arguments

    CIVIL Judge Jr. Dn. J.m.f.c, Palus

  5. 03-Feb-2026

    Hearing

    CIVIL Judge Jr. Dn. J.m.f.c, Palus

  6. 10-Dec-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  7. 10-Dec-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. 599/2025

casestatus.in Summary

The court acquitted the defendant, Lahu Dargud Kamble, of charges under the Maharashtra Prohibition Act, Section 65(E), finding insufficient evidence to prove beyond reasonable doubt that he was illegally possessing and selling country liquor. The court noted critical procedural lapses including the absence of proper panchnama (seizure documentation) and lack of credible witness testimony, leading to reasonable doubt about the seizure itself. The defendant was ordered to be released, with seized liquor bottles to be disposed of through proper channels. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case