The State of Maharashtra vs Ramesh Bhimrao Rathod — 1089/2024

Case under Maharashtra Prohibition Act Section 65(E). Disposed: Uncontested--U/SEC. 258 OF CR.PC on 07th May 2026.

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

CNR: MHSO150019792024

Case disposed

Filing Number

1661/2024

Filing Date

13-11-2024

Registration No

1089/2024

Registration Date

13-11-2024

Court

Civil Court Junior Division ,Akkalkot

Judge

2-CJJD and JMFC Akkalkot.

Decision Date

07th May 2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--U/SEC. 258 OF CR.PC

FIR Details

FIR Number

551

Police Station

South Police Station

Year

2024

Acts & Sections

MAHARASHTRA PROHIBITION ACT Section 65(E)

Petitioner(s)

The State of Maharashtra

Adv. App

Respondent(s)

Ramesh Bhimrao Rathod

Hearing History

Judge: 2-CJJD and JMFC Akkalkot.

07-05-2026

Disposed

13-03-2026

Order on Exh

04-02-2026

Order on Exh

29-10-2025

Appearance

31-07-2025

Appearance

Final Orders / Judgements

07-05-2026
Order on Exhibit

Case Summary: State vs. Ramesh Bhimrao Rathod (1089/2024) The court dismissed the case under Section 258 Cr.P.C. against accused Ramesh Rathod, charged under Section 65(e) of the Maharashtra Prohibition Act, due to the accused's consistent absence despite multiple summons over more than one year. The Judicial Magistrate found that continuing the proceedings would constitute abuse of process, especially since police had destroyed the seized evidence (muddemal), rendering prosecution impossible. The accused's P.R. bonds were cancelled. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: State vs. Ramesh Bhimrao Rathod (1089/2024) The court dismissed the case under Section 258 Cr.P.C. against accused Ramesh Rathod, charged under Section 65(e) of the Maharashtra Prohibition Act, due to the accused's consistent absence despite multiple summons over more than one year. The Judicial Magistrate found that continuing the proceedings would constitute abuse of process, especially since police had destroyed the seized evidence (muddemal), rendering prosecution impossible. The accused's P.R. bonds were cancelled. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

Civil Court Junior Division ,Akkalkot All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case