The State of Maharashtra vs Omprakash Shivalal Pawar — 502/2023

Case under Maharashtra Prohibition Act Section 65,F. Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 04th June 2026.

Case disposed

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

CNR: MHYA130011052023

Filing Number

975/2023

Filing Date

08-Aug-2023

Registration No

502/2023

Registration Date

08-Aug-2023

Court

Civil Judge Junior Division Digras

Judge

1-Civil Judge Jr.Dn. and J.m.f.c., Digras

Decision Date

04-Jun-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ACQUITTED

Last updated 17-Jul-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

407

Police Station

P.S.Digras

Year

2023

Acts & Sections

Maharashtra Prohibition Act Section 65,F

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.The State of Maharashtra

    Adv. A.P.P.

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Omprakash Shivalal Pawar

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 04-Jun-2026

    Copy of Judgment

    Case 502/2023: State of Maharashtra v. Omprakash Shivalal Pawar Decision: The court acquitted respondent Omprakash Shivalal Pawar of charges under Maharashtra Prohibition Act Section 65(f), finding insufficient evidence of guilt. The prosecution failed to prove the case, having examined only one witness (the seizure panchanama witness) and produced no chemical analysis report establishing that seized materials were narcotic substances. Key Reasoning: The court found critical evidentiary gaps: the prosecution did not examine other witnesses, did not provide chemical analysis, and failed to establish the seized substance's nature as a narcotic drug. The respondent was ordered acquitted under Indian Code of Criminal Procedure 2023 Section 278(a) with bond cancellation and Rs. 15,000 bail bond requirement. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 04-Jun-2026

    Disposed

    Civil Judge Jr.Dn. and J.m.f.c., Digras

  4. 02-Jun-2026

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

    Civil Judge Jr.Dn. and J.m.f.c., Digras

  5. 26-May-2026

    Evidence

    Civil Judge Jr.Dn. and J.m.f.c., Digras

  6. 28-Apr-2026

    Evidence

    Civil Judge Jr.Dn. and J.m.f.c., Digras

  7. 08-Apr-2026

    Evidence

    Civil Judge Jr.Dn. and J.m.f.c., Digras

  8. 13-Mar-2026

    Evidence

    Civil Judge Jr.Dn. and J.m.f.c., Digras

  9. 11-Mar-2026

    Evidence

    Civil Judge Jr.Dn. and J.m.f.c., Digras

  10. 13-Feb-2026

    Evidence

    Civil Judge Jr.Dn. and J.m.f.c., Digras

  11. 30-Jan-2026

    Evidence

    Civil Judge Jr.Dn. and J.m.f.c., Digras

  12. 16-Jan-2026

    Evidence

    Civil Judge Jr.Dn. and J.m.f.c., Digras

  13. 08-Jan-2026

    Evidence

    Civil Judge Jr.Dn. and J.m.f.c., Digras

  14. 16-Oct-2025

    Plea / Particulars

    Civil Judge Jr.Dn. and J.m.f.c., Digras

  15. 23-Jul-2025

    Plea / Particulars

    Civil Judge Jr.Dn. and J.m.f.c., Digras

  16. 26-May-2025

    Appearance

    Civil Judge Jr.Dn. and J.m.f.c., Digras

  17. 20-Feb-2025

    Appearance

    Civil Judge Jr.Dn. and J.m.f.c., Digras

  18. 21-Oct-2024

    Appearance

    Civil Judge Jr.Dn. and J.m.f.c., Digras

  19. 20-Jul-2024

    Order

    Civil Judge Jr.Dn. and J.m.f.c., Digras

  20. 20-May-2024

    Appearance

    Civil Judge Jr.Dn. and J.m.f.c., Digras

  21. 22-Mar-2024

    Appearance

    Civil Judge Jr.Dn. and J.m.f.c., Digras

  22. 24-Jan-2024

    Appearance

    Civil Judge Jr.Dn. and J.m.f.c., Digras

  23. 15-Dec-2023

    Appearance

    Civil Judge Jr.Dn. and J.m.f.c., Digras

  24. 27-Sep-2023

    Appearance

    Civil Judge Jr.Dn. and J.m.f.c., Digras

  25. 14-Aug-2023

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  26. 08-Aug-2023

    Case filed

    Registration No. 502/2023

casestatus.in Summary

Case 502/2023: State of Maharashtra v. Omprakash Shivalal Pawar Decision: The court acquitted respondent Omprakash Shivalal Pawar of charges under Maharashtra Prohibition Act Section 65(f), finding insufficient evidence of guilt. The prosecution failed to prove the case, having examined only one witness (the seizure panchanama witness) and produced no chemical analysis report establishing that seized materials were narcotic substances. Key Reasoning: The court found critical evidentiary gaps: the prosecution did not examine other witnesses, did not provide chemical analysis, and failed to establish the seized substance's nature as a narcotic drug. The respondent was ordered acquitted under Indian Code of Criminal Procedure 2023 Section 278(a) with bond cancellation and Rs. 15,000 bail bond requirement. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case