State of Bihar through Sanjula Devi vs Mukesh Kumar bhagat — 702/2025

Case under Information Technology Act Section 67A. Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 09th March 2026.

SESSION CASE

CNR: BRDA010095282025

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

8639/2025

Filing Date

06-12-2025

Registration No

702/2025

Registration Date

06-12-2025

Court

DJ Div. Darbhanga

Judge

2-District and Addl. Sessions Judge-I

Decision Date

09th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ACQUITTED

FIR Details

FIR Number

0077

Police Station

Mahila P.S.

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

Information Technology Act Section 67A
Mediation Act Section 69

Petitioner(s)

State of Bihar through Sanjula Devi

Respondent(s)

Mukesh Kumar bhagat

Hearing History

Judge: 2-District and Addl. Sessions Judge-I

09-03-2026

Disposed

07-03-2026

JUDGEMENT

24-02-2026

JUDGEMENT

11-02-2026

ARGUMENTS

02-02-2026

STATEMENT U/S.313 CR.P.C.

Final Orders / Judgements

09-03-2026
Copy of Judgment

JUDGMENT SUMMARY The District & Additional Sessions Judge, Darbhanga, acquitted Mukesh Kumar Bhagat of charges under Sections 69 BNS and 66E & 67A of the Information Technology Act. The court found that the prosecution miserably failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, primarily because the sole victim and informant herself completely resiled from the allegations in her testimony, stating that no such incident occurred and that she filed the case in anger over a land dispute. With the victim's testimony unreliable and other prosecution witnesses declared hostile, the court concluded conviction was impossible. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

JUDGMENT SUMMARY The District & Additional Sessions Judge, Darbhanga, acquitted Mukesh Kumar Bhagat of charges under Sections 69 BNS and 66E & 67A of the Information Technology Act. The court found that the prosecution miserably failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, primarily because the sole victim and informant herself completely resiled from the allegations in her testimony, stating that no such incident occurred and that she filed the case in anger over a land dispute. With the victim's testimony unreliable and other prosecution witnesses declared hostile, the court concluded conviction was impossible. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

DJ Div. Darbhanga All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case