The State of Maharashtra vs Mujib Abdul Latid Bagwan Advocate - Khobare Santosh Manohar — 96/2025

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 328,188,272,273. Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 13th March 2026.

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

CNR: MHSO010014172025

Case disposed

Filing Number

936/2025

Filing Date

23-04-2025

Registration No

96/2025

Registration Date

24-04-2025

Court

District and Session Court , Solapur

Judge

4-District Judge - 2 and Additional Session Judge

Decision Date

13th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ACQUITTED

FIR Details

FIR Number

124

Police Station

Aklakot North

Year

2023

Acts & Sections

INDIAN PENAL CODE Section 328,188,272,273
Food Safety and Standards Act,2006 Section 26(2)(i),26(2),(iv),27(3),(e),3(1),(zz)(iii),59

Petitioner(s)

The State of Maharashtra

Adv. DGP P.M.Rajput

Respondent(s)

Mujib Abdul Latid Bagwan Advocate - Khobare Santosh Manohar

Hearing History

Judge: 4-District Judge - 2 and Additional Session Judge

13-03-2026

Disposed

10-03-2026

Arguments

26-02-2026

Evidence Part Heard

22-01-2026

Hearing

19-12-2025

Hearing

Final Orders / Judgements

13-03-2026
Copy of Judgment

Case Summary: State of Maharashtra v. Mujib Abdul Latif Bagwan Court Decision (13 March 2026): The Additional Sessions Court, Solapur, acquitted defendant Mujib Abdul Latif Bagwan of charges under IPC sections 328, 188, 272, 273 and Food Safety Act 2006 sections 26(2)(i), 26(2)(iv), 27(3)(e), 59, and 3(1)(zz)(iii). The prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt despite seizing prohibited food items from an illegal roadside vendor setup. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: State of Maharashtra v. Mujib Abdul Latif Bagwan Court Decision (13 March 2026): The Additional Sessions Court, Solapur, acquitted defendant Mujib Abdul Latif Bagwan of charges under IPC sections 328, 188, 272, 273 and Food Safety Act 2006 sections 26(2)(i), 26(2)(iv), 27(3)(e), 59, and 3(1)(zz)(iii). The prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt despite seizing prohibited food items from an illegal roadside vendor setup. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

District and Session Court , Solapur All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case