State of Maharashtra vs Pandurang Wahilkar 2 Advocate - Patil R.R. — 269/2020
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 294,506. Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 07th May 2026.
S.C.C. - Summons/Summary Criminal Case
CNR: MHWR040004492020
Filing Number
425/2020
Filing Date
01-07-2020
Registration No
269/2020
Registration Date
01-07-2020
Court
Civil Judge Junior Division , Seloo
Judge
1-CIVIL JUDGE JR.DN. AND JMFC, SELOO.
Decision Date
07th May 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ACQUITTED
FIR Details
FIR Number
218
Police Station
Police Station Seloo
Year
2020
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State of Maharashtra
Adv. App for the state
Respondent(s)
Pandurang Wahilkar 2 Advocate - Patil R.R.
Dyneshwar@ Babalu Wahilkar
Adv. Patil R.R.
Nishikant Wahilkar
Adv. Patil R.R.
Hearing History
Judge: 1-CIVIL JUDGE JR.DN. AND JMFC, SELOO.
Disposed
Arguments
Arguments
Evidence
Evidence
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 07-05-2026 | Disposed |
| 07-04-2026 | Arguments |
| 27-03-2026 | Arguments |
| 24-03-2026 | Evidence |
| 17-03-2026 | Evidence |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The Selu District Court acquitted all three accused (Pandurang Narayan Wahilkar, Gyaneshwar alias Bablu Narayan Wahilkar, and Nishikant Pandurang Wahilkar) of charges under IPC Sections 294 and 506 with Section 34. The court found that while the complainant testified to the accused using obscene language and making threats, the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt due to weak and insufficient evidence, including lack of independent witnesses and reliance on a single complainant whose testimony contained contradictions. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The Selu District Court acquitted all three accused (Pandurang Narayan Wahilkar, Gyaneshwar alias Bablu Narayan Wahilkar, and Nishikant Pandurang Wahilkar) of charges under IPC Sections 294 and 506 with Section 34. The court found that while the complainant testified to the accused using obscene language and making threats, the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt due to weak and insufficient evidence, including lack of independent witnesses and reliance on a single complainant whose testimony contained contradictions. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts