State of Mahrashtra through Police Station, Manora vs Madhukar Bhattu Rathod — 229/2025

Case under Maharashtra Prohibition Act Section 65(e). Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 16th March 2026.

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

CNR: MHWS090003742025

Case disposed

Filing Number

326/2025

Filing Date

01-04-2025

Registration No

229/2025

Registration Date

01-04-2025

Court

Civil Court Junior Division, Manora

Judge

4-Jt. Civil Judge, Jr. dn. and JMFC., Manora

Decision Date

16th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ACQUITTED

FIR Details

FIR Number

168

Police Station

P. S. Manora

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

MAHARASHTRA PROHIBITION ACT Section 65(e)

Petitioner(s)

State of Mahrashtra through Police Station, Manora

Respondent(s)

Madhukar Bhattu Rathod

Hearing History

Judge: 4-Jt. Civil Judge, Jr. dn. and JMFC., Manora

16-03-2026

Disposed

06-03-2026

Evidence Part Heard

23-01-2026

Evidence

19-12-2025

Evidence

21-11-2025

Awaiting Summons

Final Orders / Judgements

16-03-2026
Copy of Judgment

Case Summary: 229/2025 The court acquitted defendant Madhukar Bhattu Rathod of charges under the Mumbai Prohibition Act, Section 65(E), for allegedly possessing 33 bottles of alcohol on 15/03/2025 in Manora. The prosecution's sole witness (a panchnama official) could not credibly establish that the seized liquor was recovered from the defendant's possession, as the court found contradictions in the evidence and absence of supporting documentation. Without sufficient corroborating evidence or chemical analysis reports, the court ruled the charges unproven and ordered the defendant's acquittal. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: 229/2025 The court acquitted defendant Madhukar Bhattu Rathod of charges under the Mumbai Prohibition Act, Section 65(E), for allegedly possessing 33 bottles of alcohol on 15/03/2025 in Manora. The prosecution's sole witness (a panchnama official) could not credibly establish that the seized liquor was recovered from the defendant's possession, as the court found contradictions in the evidence and absence of supporting documentation. Without sufficient corroborating evidence or chemical analysis reports, the court ruled the charges unproven and ordered the defendant's acquittal. 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, Manora All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case