The State of Maharashtra ( Excise Office) vs Sushil Suresh Jagtap — 1649/2024
Case under Maharashtra Prohibition Act Section 65(e). Disposed: Uncontested--U/SEC. 258 OF CR.PC on 13th March 2026.
S.C.C. - Summons/Summary Criminal Case
CNR: MHST140023202024
Filing Number
1969/2024
Filing Date
07-08-2024
Registration No
1649/2024
Registration Date
16-08-2024
Court
Civil Court Junior Division , Phaltan
Judge
4-5th Jt. Civil Judge Jr.Dn. J.M.F.C. Phaltan
Decision Date
13th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--U/SEC. 258 OF CR.PC
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
The State of Maharashtra ( Excise Office)
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
Sushil Suresh Jagtap
Hearing History
Judge: 4-5th Jt. Civil Judge Jr.Dn. J.M.F.C. Phaltan
Disposed
Awaiting Summons
Awaiting Summons
Awaiting Summons
Awaiting Summons
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 13-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 06-03-2026 | Awaiting Summons |
| 30-01-2026 | Awaiting Summons |
| 24-11-2025 | Awaiting Summons |
| 20-09-2025 | Awaiting Summons |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary: The court stopped proceedings and discharged the accused Sushil Suresh Jagatap in a Maharashtra Prohibition Act section 65(E) case due to the prosecution's failure to secure the accused's presence and the absence of a chemical analyzer report on record. The court found no purpose in continuing the trial without this critical evidence and ordered the seized material sent to the State Excise Department for disposal. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: The court stopped proceedings and discharged the accused Sushil Suresh Jagatap in a Maharashtra Prohibition Act section 65(E) case due to the prosecution's failure to secure the accused's presence and the absence of a chemical analyzer report on record. The court found no purpose in continuing the trial without this critical evidence and ordered the seized material sent to the State Excise Department for disposal. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts