JAMUI SC/ST-09/25- CHANDAN DAS vs RAJ KUMAR ALIYAS ROCKY RAWAT — 83/2025
Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 126(2),115(2),351(2),352,74. Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 13th May 2026.
SPL CASE (SC/ST) - SPL CASE(SC/ST)
CNR: BRJA010036302025
Filing Number
3279/2025
Filing Date
01-07-2025
Registration No
83/2025
Registration Date
01-07-2025
Court
DJ Div. Jamui
Judge
2-District And Additional Sessions Judge I, Jamui
Decision Date
13th May 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ACQUITTED
FIR Details
FIR Number
09
Police Station
JAMUI SC/ST
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
JAMUI SC/ST-09/25- CHANDAN DAS
Respondent(s)
RAJ KUMAR ALIYAS ROCKY RAWAT
SAGAR KUMAR ALIYAS SAGAR RAWAT
Adv. null
Hearing History
Judge: 2-District And Additional Sessions Judge I, Jamui
Disposed
ARGUMENT
EVIDENCE
EVIDENCE
EVIDENCE
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 13-05-2026 | Disposed |
| 12-05-2026 | ARGUMENT |
| 11-05-2026 | EVIDENCE |
| 27-04-2026 | EVIDENCE |
| 16-03-2026 | EVIDENCE |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: SC/ST Case No. 83/2025 Court Decision: The District & Additional Sessions Judge (SC/ST Act), Jamui acquitted both accused—Sagar Kumar (alias Sagar Rawat) and Raj Kumar (alias Rocky Rawat)—of all charges under IPC sections 126(2), 115(2), 74, 351(2), 352 and SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989 sections 3(i)(r), 3(i)(s), 3(i)(w), 3(2)(va). Key Reasoning: The prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. Prosecution witness (informant) Chandan Das admitted during cross-examination that the case was filed due to misunderstanding, and witness Mamta Kumari testified that no assault occurred against her or her husband. The court found insufficient credible evidence to sustain the charges against the accused. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: SC/ST Case No. 83/2025 Court Decision: The District & Additional Sessions Judge (SC/ST Act), Jamui acquitted both accused—Sagar Kumar (alias Sagar Rawat) and Raj Kumar (alias Rocky Rawat)—of all charges under IPC sections 126(2), 115(2), 74, 351(2), 352 and SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989 sections 3(i)(r), 3(i)(s), 3(i)(w), 3(2)(va). Key Reasoning: The prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. Prosecution witness (informant) Chandan Das admitted during cross-examination that the case was filed due to misunderstanding, and witness Mamta Kumari testified that no assault occurred against her or her husband. The court found insufficient credible evidence to sustain the charges against the accused. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts