State of Mahrashtra through Police Station, Manora vs Amar Bhanudas Kamble — 95/2022
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 294, 427, 506. Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 11th May 2026.
R.C.C. - Regular Criminal Case
CNR: MHWS090004782022
Filing Number
426/2022
Filing Date
25-03-2022
Registration No
95/2022
Registration Date
25-03-2022
Court
Civil Court Junior Division, Manora
Judge
4-Jt. Civil Judge, Jr. dn. and JMFC., Manora
Decision Date
11th May 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ACQUITTED
FIR Details
FIR Number
525
Police Station
P. S. Manora
Year
2021
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State of Mahrashtra through Police Station, Manora
Adv. App
Respondent(s)
Amar Bhanudas Kamble
Hearing History
Judge: 4-Jt. Civil Judge, Jr. dn. and JMFC., Manora
Disposed
Arguments
Arguments
Arguments
Arguments
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 11-05-2026 | Disposed |
| 20-04-2026 | Arguments |
| 27-03-2026 | Arguments |
| 16-03-2026 | Arguments |
| 09-03-2026 | Arguments |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: State of Maharashtra v. Amar Bhanudas Kamble (95/2022) The court acquitted the accused, Amar Bhanudas Kamble, of charges under IPC Sections 294 (obscene language), 427 (mischief), and 506 (criminal intimidation). The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the essential elements of the alleged offenses—that on 01/08/2021, the accused used obscene language, damaged the complainant's motorcycle causing ₹10,000 loss, and issued death threats. The sole prosecution witness (the complainant) did not substantiate these claims during examination and later admitted to an out-of-court settlement with the accused. Without credible corroborating evidence, the court held the charges unproven and declared the accused not guilty. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: State of Maharashtra v. Amar Bhanudas Kamble (95/2022) The court acquitted the accused, Amar Bhanudas Kamble, of charges under IPC Sections 294 (obscene language), 427 (mischief), and 506 (criminal intimidation). The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the essential elements of the alleged offenses—that on 01/08/2021, the accused used obscene language, damaged the complainant's motorcycle causing ₹10,000 loss, and issued death threats. The sole prosecution witness (the complainant) did not substantiate these claims during examination and later admitted to an out-of-court settlement with the accused. Without credible corroborating evidence, the court held the charges unproven and declared the accused not guilty. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts