State of Maharashtra through PSO Shirpur vs Maroti Pandharinath Vaidya — 75/2023

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 376,(2)(N). Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 09th April 2026.

Case disposed

Spl.Case Child Prot. - Spl.Case under POCSO Act

CNR: MHWS010016702023

Filing Number

670/2023

Filing Date

01-Dec-2023

Registration No

75/2023

Registration Date

01-Dec-2023

Court

District and Sessions Court, Washim

Judge

3-District Judge 2 and Asj, Washim

Decision Date

09-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ACQUITTED

Last updated 15-Jun-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

350

Police Station

SHIRPUR

Year

2023

Acts & Sections

Indian Penal Code Section 376,(2)(N)
The Protection of Children from Sexual Offence Act, 2012 Section 4,5,6
Prohibition of Child Marriage Act Section 9,11

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.State of Maharashtra through PSO Shirpur

    Adv. App

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Maroti Pandharinath Vaidya

  2. 2.Pandharinath Gyanoba Vaidya

  3. 3.Sau. Antakala Gajanan Bhutekar

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 09-Apr-2026

    Copy of JudgmentView PDF

    Case Summary: State of Maharashtra v. Maroti Pandharinath Vaidya (75/2023) The court acquitted all three accused of charges under IPC Section 376(2)(n) and Sections 3-4, 5-6, 9-10, and 11 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. The prosecution failed to prove that the victim was a minor at the time of the alleged offense, with conflicting evidence regarding her birth date making guilt unproven beyond reasonable doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 09-Apr-2026

    Disposed

    District Judge 2 and Asj, Washim

  4. 07-Apr-2026

    Judgment

    District Judge 2 and Asj, Washim

  5. 04-Apr-2026

    Judgment

    District Judge 2 and Asj, Washim

  6. 16-Mar-2026

    Arguments

    District Judge 2 and Asj, Washim

  7. 11-Mar-2026

    Statement U/sec.313 Cr.P.C.

    District Judge 2 and Asj, Washim

  8. 05-Mar-2026

    Evidence

    District Judge 2 and Asj, Washim

  9. 18-Feb-2026

    Evidence

    District Judge 2 and Asj, Washim

  10. 06-Feb-2026

    Evidence

    District Judge 2 and Asj, Washim

  11. 30-Jan-2026

    Evidence

    District Judge 2 and Asj, Washim

  12. 20-Jan-2026

    Evidence

    District Judge 2 and Asj, Washim

  13. 01-Jan-2026

    Evidence

    District Judge 2 and Asj, Washim

  14. 11-Dec-2025

    List of Witness

    District Judge 2 and Asj, Washim

  15. 20-Nov-2025

    List of Witness

    District Judge 2 and Asj, Washim

  16. 27-Oct-2025

    List of Witness

    District Judge 2 and Asj, Washim

  17. 24-Sep-2025

    Charge

    District Judge 2 and Asj, Washim

  18. 20-Aug-2025

    Charge

    District Judge 2 and Asj, Washim

  19. 30-Jul-2025

    Charge

    Ad-hoc Dj-1 Asj Washim

  20. 09-Jul-2025

    Charge

    Ad-hoc Dj-1 Asj Washim

  21. 23-May-2025

    Charge

    Ad-hoc Dj-2 and Asj, Washim

  22. 01-Apr-2025

    Charge

    Ad-hoc Dj-2 and Asj, Washim

  23. 18-Feb-2025

    Charge

    Ad-hoc Dj-2 and Asj, Washim

  24. 23-Dec-2024

    Charge

    Ad-hoc Dj-2 and Asj, Washim

  25. 04-Nov-2024

    Charge

    Ad-hoc Dj-2 and Asj, Washim

  26. 12-Sep-2024

    Appearance

    Ad-hoc Dj-2 and Asj, Washim

  27. 31-Jul-2024

    Appearance

    Ad-hoc Dj-2 and Asj, Washim

  28. 26-Jun-2024

    Appearance

    Ad-hoc Dj-2 and Asj, Washim

  29. 07-May-2024

    Appearance

    Ad-hoc Dj-1 Asj Washim

  30. 02-Mar-2024

    Appearance

    Ad-hoc Dj-2 and Asj, Washim

  31. 01-Dec-2023

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  32. 01-Dec-2023

    Case filed

    Registration No. 75/2023

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: State of Maharashtra v. Maroti Pandharinath Vaidya (75/2023) The court acquitted all three accused of charges under IPC Section 376(2)(n) and Sections 3-4, 5-6, 9-10, and 11 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. The prosecution failed to prove that the victim was a minor at the time of the alleged offense, with conflicting evidence regarding her birth date making guilt unproven beyond reasonable doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case