ANKIT KUMAR vs MD. AMIR EKBAL URF AMRIT DON — 558/2025

Case under Arms Act Section 25(1-b)a,27. Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 05th June 2026.

Case disposed

SESSION CASE

CNR: BRBE010051992025

Filing Number

4829/2025

Filing Date

16-Jun-2025

Registration No

558/2025

Registration Date

16-Jun-2025

Court

DJ Div. Begusarai

Judge

1-Principal District and Sessions Judge

Decision Date

05-Jun-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ACQUITTED

Last updated 11-Jul-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

0194

Police Station

BIRPUR

Year

2024

Acts & Sections

Arms Act Section 25(1-b)a,27
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 127,110,3(5)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.ANKIT KUMAR

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.MD. AMIR EKBAL URF AMRIT DON

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 05-Jun-2026

    Copy of Judgment

    Case Summary: S.T. Case No. 558/2025 Court Decision: The Principal Sessions Judge, Begusarai acquitted accused Md. Amir Iqbal @ Amrit Don of all charges under Sections 110/3(5), 127(2)/3(5) of BNS and Sections 25(1-b)a, 27 of the Arms Act on 05.06.2026. Key Reasoning: The court found that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. Three of four prosecution witnesses were declared hostile and provided no support. The informant (PW-2) admitted he was not present at the occurrence and had only hearsay knowledge. No eyewitness testified, no independent witness supported the case, and the alleged recovery/seizure lacked proper proof. The court applied the cardinal principle that suspicion, however strong, cannot replace legal proof, and granted the accused the benefit of doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 05-Jun-2026

    Disposed

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  4. 02-Jun-2026

    Judgement

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  5. 01-Jun-2026

    Arguments

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  6. 20-May-2026

    Statement U/S.313 Cr.p.c.

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  7. 02-May-2026

    Evidence

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  8. 15-Apr-2026

    Evidence

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  9. 25-Mar-2026

    Evidence

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  10. 02-Mar-2026

    Evidence

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  11. 06-Feb-2026

    Evidence

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  12. 20-Jan-2026

    Evidence

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  13. 22-Dec-2025

    Evidence

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  14. 16-Dec-2025

    Evidence

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  15. 04-Dec-2025

    Evidence

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  16. 28-Nov-2025

    Evidence

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  17. 15-Nov-2025

    Evidence

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  18. 11-Nov-2025

    Charge

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  19. 04-Nov-2025

    Charge

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  20. 16-Oct-2025

    Charge

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  21. 25-Sep-2025

    Charge

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  22. 16-Sep-2025

    Charge

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  23. 02-Sep-2025

    Charge

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  24. 20-Aug-2025

    Charge

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  25. 06-Aug-2025

    Charge

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  26. 24-Jul-2025

    Charge

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  27. 10-Jul-2025

    Charge

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  28. 30-Jun-2025

    Appearence

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  29. 17-Jun-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  30. 16-Jun-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. 558/2025

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: S.T. Case No. 558/2025 Court Decision: The Principal Sessions Judge, Begusarai acquitted accused Md. Amir Iqbal @ Amrit Don of all charges under Sections 110/3(5), 127(2)/3(5) of BNS and Sections 25(1-b)a, 27 of the Arms Act on 05.06.2026. Key Reasoning: The court found that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. Three of four prosecution witnesses were declared hostile and provided no support. The informant (PW-2) admitted he was not present at the occurrence and had only hearsay knowledge. No eyewitness testified, no independent witness supported the case, and the alleged recovery/seizure lacked proper proof. The court applied the cardinal principle that suspicion, however strong, cannot replace legal proof, and granted the accused the benefit of doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case