State of Maharashtra vs Druv Maroti Telnge Advocate - Rathod S.S. — 75/2019
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 420. Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 26th May 2026.
R.C.C. - Regular Criminal Case
CNR: MHYA140007092019
Filing Number
658/2019
Filing Date
19-Jun-2019
Registration No
75/2019
Registration Date
19-Jun-2019
Court
Civil Court Junior Division,Arni
Judge
1-Civil Judge Jr.Dn.and J.m.f.c., Arni
Decision Date
26-May-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ACQUITTED
Last updated 16-Jul-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
17
Police Station
Arni
Year
2019
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.State of Maharashtra
Adv. Bagwale J. K. APP
Respondent(s)
-
1.Druv Maroti Telnge Advocate - Rathod S.S.
-
2.Gajanan Uttam Chavhan
Adv. Chaudhary P.V.
-
3.Jayvant Devala Chavhan
Adv. Chaudhary P.V.
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
26-May-2026
Copy of Judgment
Summary The First Class Judicial Magistrate Court in Arni, Yavatmal district, acquitted two accused (Gajanan Uttam Chavhan and Jayavant Devla Chavhan) under IPC Section 420 with 34. The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the fraud charges beyond reasonable doubt due to: (1) lack of independent, credible witnesses; (2) absence of expert analysis of the alleged weight discrepancy in soybean sales; (3) significant inconsistencies in the complainant's written FIR versus court testimony; and (4) insufficient corroborating evidence linking the accused to the crime. The court invoked the "benefit of doubt" principle in favor of the accused. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
26-May-2026
Disposed
Civil Judge Jr.Dn.and J.m.f.c., Arni
-
20-May-2026
Arguments
Civil Judge Jr.Dn.and J.m.f.c., Arni
-
27-Apr-2026
Arguments
Civil Judge Jr.Dn.and J.m.f.c., Arni
-
22-Apr-2026
Arguments
Civil Judge Jr.Dn.and J.m.f.c., Arni
-
25-Mar-2026
Arguments
Civil Judge Jr.Dn.and J.m.f.c., Arni
-
11-Mar-2026
Arguments
Civil Judge Jr.Dn.and J.m.f.c., Arni
-
04-Feb-2026
Arguments
Civil Judge Jr.Dn.and J.m.f.c., Arni
-
03-Jan-2026
Arguments
Civil Judge Jr.Dn.and J.m.f.c., Arni
-
06-Dec-2025
Arguments
Civil Judge Jr.Dn.and J.m.f.c., Arni
-
24-Nov-2025
Statement U/sec.313 Cr.P.C.
Civil Judge Jr.Dn.and J.m.f.c., Arni
-
27-Oct-2025
Evidence Part Heard
Civil Judge Jr.Dn.and J.m.f.c., Arni
-
23-Sep-2025
Evidence Part Heard
Civil Judge Jr.Dn.and J.m.f.c., Arni
-
26-Aug-2025
Evidence Part Heard
Civil Judge Jr.Dn.and J.m.f.c., Arni
-
16-Jul-2025
Evidence Part Heard
Civil Judge Jr.Dn.and J.m.f.c., Arni
-
18-Jun-2025
Evidence Part Heard
Civil Judge Jr.Dn.and J.m.f.c., Arni
-
06-May-2025
Evidence Part Heard
Civil Judge Jr.Dn.and J.m.f.c., Arni
-
09-Apr-2025
Evidence Part Heard
Civil Judge Jr.Dn.and J.m.f.c., Arni
-
13-Mar-2025
Evidence Part Heard
Civil Judge Jr.Dn.and J.m.f.c., Arni
-
24-Feb-2025
Evidence Part Heard
Civil Judge Jr.Dn.and J.m.f.c., Arni
-
13-Jan-2025
Evidence Part Heard
Civil Judge Jr.Dn.and J.m.f.c., Arni
-
25-Nov-2024
Evidence Part Heard
Civil Judge Jr.Dn.and J.m.f.c., Arni
-
22-Oct-2024
Evidence Part Heard
Civil Judge Jr.Dn.and J.m.f.c., Arni
-
23-Sep-2024
Evidence Part Heard
Civil Judge Jr.Dn.and J.m.f.c., Arni
-
31-Jul-2024
Evidence Part Heard
Civil Judge Jr.Dn.and J.m.f.c., Arni
-
25-Jun-2024
Evidence Part Heard
Civil Judge Jr.Dn.and J.m.f.c., Arni
-
23-Apr-2024
Evidence Part Heard
Civil Judge Jr.Dn.and J.m.f.c., Arni
-
16-Mar-2024
Evidence Part Heard
Civil Judge Jr.Dn.and J.m.f.c., Arni
-
17-Feb-2024
Evidence Part Heard
Civil Judge Jr.Dn.and J.m.f.c., Arni
-
03-Jan-2024
Evidence Part Heard
Civil Judge Jr.Dn.and J.m.f.c., Arni
-
07-Nov-2023
N.B.W._Ready
Civil Judge Jr.Dn.and J.m.f.c., Arni
-
12-Sep-2023
Evidence Part Heard
Civil Judge Jr.Dn.and J.m.f.c., Arni
-
17-Jul-2023
Evidence Part Heard
Civil Judge Jr.Dn.and J.m.f.c., Arni
-
26-Apr-2023
Evidence Part Heard
Civil Judge Jr.Dn.and J.m.f.c., Arni
-
21-Feb-2023
Evidence Part Heard
Civil Judge Jr.Dn.and J.m.f.c., Arni
-
17-Jan-2023
Evidence Part Heard
Civil Judge Jr.Dn.and J.m.f.c., Arni
-
19-Dec-2022
Evidence Part Heard
Civil Judge Jr.Dn.and J.m.f.c., Arni
-
08-Nov-2022
Evidence
Civil Judge Jr.Dn.and J.m.f.c., Arni
-
04-Oct-2022
Evidence
Civil Judge Jr.Dn.and J.m.f.c., Arni
-
13-Aug-2022
Evidence
Civil Judge Jr.Dn.and J.m.f.c., Arni
-
15-Jun-2022
Evidence
Civil Judge Jr.Dn.and J.m.f.c., Arni
-
12-Apr-2022
Evidence
Civil Judge Jr.Dn.and J.m.f.c., Arni
-
19-Mar-2022
Evidence
Civil Judge Jr.Dn.and J.m.f.c., Arni
-
29-Jan-2022
Evidence
Civil Judge Jr.Dn.and J.m.f.c., Arni
-
18-Dec-2021
Evidence
Civil Judge Jr.Dn.and J.m.f.c., Arni
-
13-Nov-2021
Evidence
Civil Judge Jr.Dn.and J.m.f.c., Arni
-
09-Oct-2021
Evidence
Civil Judge Jr.Dn.and J.m.f.c., Arni
-
18-Sep-2021
Evidence
Civil Judge Jr.Dn.and J.m.f.c., Arni
-
16-Aug-2021
Evidence
Civil Judge Jr.Dn.and J.m.f.c., Arni
-
29-Jul-2021
Evidence
Civil Judge Jr.Dn.and J.m.f.c., Arni
-
17-Jun-2021
Evidence
Civil Judge Jr.Dn.and J.m.f.c., Arni
-
17-Apr-2021
Evidence
Civil Judge Jr.Dn.and J.m.f.c., Arni
-
26-Feb-2021
Evidence
Civil Judge Jr.Dn.and J.m.f.c., Arni
-
18-Jan-2021
Evidence
Civil Judge Jr.Dn.and J.m.f.c., Arni
-
08-Dec-2020
Evidence
Civil Judge Jr.Dn.and J.m.f.c., Arni
-
11-Nov-2020
Evidence
Civil Judge Jr.Dn.and J.m.f.c., Arni
-
20-Oct-2020
Evidence
Civil Judge Jr.Dn.and J.m.f.c., Arni
-
04-Sep-2020
Evidence
Civil Judge Jr.Dn.and J.m.f.c., Arni
-
20-Jun-2020
Evidence
Civil Judge Jr.Dn.and J.m.f.c., Arni
-
16-May-2020
Evidence
Civil Judge Jr.Dn.and J.m.f.c., Arni
-
04-Apr-2020
Evidence
Civil Judge Jr.Dn.and J.m.f.c., Arni
-
07-Feb-2020
Evidence
Civil Judge Jr.Dn.and J.m.f.c., Arni
-
06-Dec-2019
Evidence
Civil Judge Jr.Dn.and J.m.f.c., Arni
-
05-Oct-2019
Charge
Civil Judge Jr.Dn.and J.m.f.c., Arni
-
08-Jul-2019
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
19-Jun-2019
Case filed
Registration No. 75/2019
Summary The First Class Judicial Magistrate Court in Arni, Yavatmal district, acquitted two accused (Gajanan Uttam Chavhan and Jayavant Devla Chavhan) under IPC Section 420 with 34. The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the fraud charges beyond reasonable doubt due to: (1) lack of independent, credible witnesses; (2) absence of expert analysis of the alleged weight discrepancy in soybean sales; (3) significant inconsistencies in the complainant's written FIR versus court testimony; and (4) insufficient corroborating evidence linking the accused to the crime. The court invoked the "benefit of doubt" principle in favor of the accused. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts