SHANKAR PANDIT vs RAM NANDAN PANDIT — 13998/2014

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 323,504,379,. Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 17th March 2026.

Cr. Case Complaint (P)

CNR: BRBE310004682014

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

13998/2014

Filing Date

27-05-2014

Registration No

13998/2014

Registration Date

27-05-2014

Court

Balia CJM Division

Judge

2-Judicial Magistrate 1st Class-I

Decision Date

17th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ACQUITTED

Acts & Sections

Indian Penal Code Section 323,504,379,
Witchcraft Act Section 3,4

Petitioner(s)

SHANKAR PANDIT

Respondent(s)

RAM NANDAN PANDIT

NAGESHWAR KUMAR

VIKASH LKUMAR

SUDHA DEVI

SANJAY PANDIT

Hearing History

Judge: 2-Judicial Magistrate 1st Class-I

17-03-2026

Disposed

16-03-2026

ARGUMENTS

09-03-2026

ARGUMENTS

07-03-2026

ARGUMENTS

26-02-2026

ARGUMENTS

Final Orders / Judgements

17-03-2026
Judgment

Case Summary The Court of Kiran Kumari Judicial Magistrate, Begusarai acquitted all five accused persons (Ram Nandan Pandit, Nageshwar Kumar, Sudha Devi, Vikash Kumar, and Sanjay Pandit) of charges under IPC Sections 323, 379, 504 and Sections 3 & 4 of the Dian Act. The court found the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt due to material contradictions, absence of medical and documentary evidence, lack of independent corroboration, and strong probability of false implication arising from prior enmity and a land dispute between the parties. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary The Court of Kiran Kumari Judicial Magistrate, Begusarai acquitted all five accused persons (Ram Nandan Pandit, Nageshwar Kumar, Sudha Devi, Vikash Kumar, and Sanjay Pandit) of charges under IPC Sections 323, 379, 504 and Sections 3 & 4 of the Dian Act. The court found the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt due to material contradictions, absence of medical and documentary evidence, lack of independent corroboration, and strong probability of false implication arising from prior enmity and a land dispute between the parties. 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

Balia CJM Division All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case