Police station kalamb vs Sudhakar Pandurang Pise Advocate - Choudhary V.A. — 243/2025

Case under Maharashtra Prohibition Act Section 65e. Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 02nd May 2026.

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

CNR: MHYA170003612025

Case disposed

Filing Number

309/2025

Filing Date

16-04-2025

Registration No

243/2025

Registration Date

16-04-2025

Court

Civil Judge Junior Division Kalamb

Judge

1-Civil Judge Jr.Dn. and J.M.F.C., Kalamb

Decision Date

02nd May 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ACQUITTED

FIR Details

FIR Number

516

Police Station

Poliice Station Kalamb

Year

2024

Acts & Sections

Maharashtra Prohibition Act Section 65e

Petitioner(s)

Police station kalamb

Adv. R.R. Trivedi

Respondent(s)

Sudhakar Pandurang Pise Advocate - Choudhary V.A.

Hearing History

Judge: 1-Civil Judge Jr.Dn. and J.M.F.C., Kalamb

02-05-2026

Disposed

12-03-2026

Evidence

26-02-2026

Evidence

28-01-2026

Plea / Particulars

14-01-2026

Plea / Particulars

Final Orders / Judgements

02-05-2026
Copy of Judgment

Court Decision Summary The First Class Judicial Magistrate acquitted the accused under the Maharashtra Prohibition of Illicit Liquor Act, finding the prosecution's case insufficient. Although 9 liters of illicit liquor was seized from the accused on 10/10/2024, the court held that the seizure panchnama (official record) was not properly substantiated, no independent witnesses testified, and crucial evidence like chemical analysis reports were missing, making the charge of possessing liquor for sale unproven beyond reasonable doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Court Decision Summary The First Class Judicial Magistrate acquitted the accused under the Maharashtra Prohibition of Illicit Liquor Act, finding the prosecution's case insufficient. Although 9 liters of illicit liquor was seized from the accused on 10/10/2024, the court held that the seizure panchnama (official record) was not properly substantiated, no independent witnesses testified, and crucial evidence like chemical analysis reports were missing, making the charge of possessing liquor for sale unproven beyond reasonable doubt. 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 Judge Junior Division Kalamb All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case