INDRAJEET CHOUDHARY vs ANAND KUMAR — 226/2021
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 341,323,307,504,506,34. Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 25th March 2026.
SESSION CASE
CNR: BRBA010035192021
Filing Number
3079/2021
Filing Date
21-09-2021
Registration No
226/2021
Registration Date
21-09-2021
Court
DJ Div. Banka
Judge
1-Principal District and Sessions Judge
Decision Date
25th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ACQUITTED
FIR Details
FIR Number
237
Police Station
AMARPUR
Year
2020
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
INDRAJEET CHOUDHARY
Adv. Sri Pawan Kumar
Respondent(s)
ANAND KUMAR
GULSAN CHOUDHARY
ANKIT CHOUDHARY
RAVISH KUMAR
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Principal District and Sessions Judge
Disposed
JUDGEMENT
ARGUMENTS
ARGUMENTS
ARGUMENTS
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 25-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 23-03-2026 | JUDGEMENT |
| 11-03-2026 | ARGUMENTS |
| 17-02-2026 | ARGUMENTS |
| 02-01-2026 | ARGUMENTS |
Final Orders / Judgements
The Sessions Court, Banka acquitted all four accused persons (Anand Kumar, Gulshan Kumar Choudhary, Ankit Kumar Choudhary, and Rabish Kumar Choudhary) of charges under IPC sections 341, 323, 307, 504, and 506/34, finding that the prosecution utterly failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. Key factors in acquittal included: two hostile witnesses denying knowledge of the incident, the informant (PW2) admitting he could not see who struck him amid a crowd, his son (PW5) unable to identify the assailant, absence of medical evidence, and no investigating officer testimony, coupled with the parties' amicable settlement. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The Sessions Court, Banka acquitted all four accused persons (Anand Kumar, Gulshan Kumar Choudhary, Ankit Kumar Choudhary, and Rabish Kumar Choudhary) of charges under IPC sections 341, 323, 307, 504, and 506/34, finding that the prosecution utterly failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. Key factors in acquittal included: two hostile witnesses denying knowledge of the incident, the informant (PW2) admitting he could not see who struck him amid a crowd, his son (PW5) unable to identify the assailant, absence of medical evidence, and no investigating officer testimony, coupled with the parties' amicable settlement. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts