Laxmi Devi vs Kundan Kumar Alias Babam — 80/2020

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 341,342,323,308,504. Disposed: Uncontested--ACQUITTED on 18th March 2026.

SESSION CASE

CNR: BRDA100002422020

Case disposed

Filing Number

80/2020

Filing Date

17-06-2020

Registration No

80/2020

Registration Date

17-06-2020

Court

D J Division, Benipur

Judge

17-District and Additonal Sessions Judge-I

Decision Date

18th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--ACQUITTED

FIR Details

FIR Number

504

Police Station

BAHERA

Year

2015

Acts & Sections

Indian Penal Code Section 341,342,323,308,504

Petitioner(s)

Laxmi Devi

Adv. UN

Respondent(s)

Kundan Kumar Alias Babam

Raman Devi

Mani Kumari

Hearing History

Judge: 17-District and Additonal Sessions Judge-I

18-03-2026

Disposed

16-03-2026

ORDER

10-03-2026

HEARING

23-02-2026

EVIDENCE

28-01-2026

EVIDENCE

Final Orders / Judgements

18-03-2026
Copy of order

Case 80/2020 Summary The court acquitted all four accused persons (Kundan Kumar Jha alias Bambam, Raman Devi, Mani Kumari, and Jagarnath Jha) of charges under IPC sections 323, 341, 342, 308, 504, 506/34, citing complete absence of evidence. Despite multiple opportunities, summons, bailable warrants, and NBW orders issued over four years, the prosecution failed to produce any witness—including the informant or alleged victim—to substantiate the assault and robbery allegations. The court held that conviction cannot rest on conjecture and the prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, which it failed to do. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case 80/2020 Summary The court acquitted all four accused persons (Kundan Kumar Jha alias Bambam, Raman Devi, Mani Kumari, and Jagarnath Jha) of charges under IPC sections 323, 341, 342, 308, 504, 506/34, citing complete absence of evidence. Despite multiple opportunities, summons, bailable warrants, and NBW orders issued over four years, the prosecution failed to produce any witness—including the informant or alleged victim—to substantiate the assault and robbery allegations. The court held that conviction cannot rest on conjecture and the prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, which it failed to do. 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

D J Division, Benipur All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case