The State of Maharashtra vs Kamlakar Sharnappa Mane — 218/2024
Case under Maharashtra Prohibition Act Section 65E. Disposed: Uncontested--U/SEC. 258 OF CR.PC on 13th March 2026.
S.C.C. - Summons/Summary Criminal Case
CNR: MHSO150003882024
Filing Number
338/2024
Filing Date
02-Mar-2024
Registration No
218/2024
Registration Date
02-Mar-2024
Court
Civil Court Junior Division ,Akkalkot
Judge
2-Cjjd and JMFC Akkalkot.
Decision Date
13-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--U/SEC. 258 OF CR.PC
Last updated 03-Jun-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
466
Police Station
South Police Station
Year
2019
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.The State of Maharashtra
Adv. App
Respondent(s)
-
1.Kamlakar Sharnappa Mane
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
13-Mar-2026
Order on ExhibitView PDF
The Judicial Magistrate dismissed proceedings against Kamalakar Mane under Section 65(e) of the Maharashtra Prohibition Act, invoking Section 258 of Cr.P.C. (Section 281 of B.N.S.S.), citing the case being over one year old with repeated failed attempts to secure the accused's presence despite multiple summons. The court found that continuing to keep the case pending would constitute abuse of process, particularly since police had destroyed the seized evidence (muddemal), rendering prosecution impossible. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
13-Mar-2026
Disposed
Cjjd and JMFC Akkalkot.
-
30-Dec-2025
Notice_Unready
Cjjd and JMFC Akkalkot.
-
16-Sep-2025
Notice_Unready
Cjjd and JMFC Akkalkot.
-
16-Jun-2025
Notice_Unready
Cjjd and JMFC Akkalkot.
-
15-Mar-2025
Notice_Unready
Cjjd and JMFC Akkalkot.
-
11-Dec-2024
Notice_Unready
Cjjd and JMFC Akkalkot.
-
09-Sep-2024
Unready Board
Cjjd and JMFC Akkalkot.
-
14-Jun-2024
Unready Board
Cjjd and JMFC Akkalkot.
-
15-Apr-2024
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
02-Mar-2024
Case filed
Registration No. 218/2024
The Judicial Magistrate dismissed proceedings against Kamalakar Mane under Section 65(e) of the Maharashtra Prohibition Act, invoking Section 258 of Cr.P.C. (Section 281 of B.N.S.S.), citing the case being over one year old with repeated failed attempts to secure the accused's presence despite multiple summons. The court found that continuing to keep the case pending would constitute abuse of process, particularly since police had destroyed the seized evidence (muddemal), rendering prosecution impossible. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts