State of Bihar vs RAJENDRA DAS — 432/2023

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 323,341,307,379,504,506,34. Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 11th March 2026.

Case disposed

SESSION CASE

CNR: BRJE010044542023

Filing Number

432/2023

Filing Date

15-May-2023

Registration No

432/2023

Registration Date

15-May-2023

Court

Jehanabad DJ Div

Judge

1-District and Sessions Judge

Decision Date

11-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ACQUITTED

Last updated 17-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

131

Police Station

PALI

Year

2022

Acts & Sections

Indian Penal Code Section 323,341,307,379,504,506,34

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.State of Bihar

    Adv. P.P

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.RAJENDRA DAS

  2. 2.KAPIL DAS

  3. 3.VINAY DAS

  4. 4.BACHHU DAS

  5. 5.MANORANJAN DAS

  6. 6.RUDHA DEVI

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 11-Mar-2026

    JudgmentView PDF

    Court Decision Summary The Sessions Judge at Jehanabad acquitted all six accused persons (Rajendra Das, Kapil Das, Vinay Das, Bachchu Das, Manoranjan Das, and Radha Devi) of charges under IPC sections 307/34, 341/34, and 504/34, finding that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. Key witnesses, including the informant and injured parties, admitted during cross-examination that they did not witness the alleged assault and could not identify the assailants, while also stating the case had been compromised. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 11-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    District and Sessions Judge

  4. 10-Mar-2026

    Arguments

    District and Sessions Judge

  5. 09-Mar-2026

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

    District and Sessions Judge

  6. 09-Feb-2026

    Evidence

    District and Sessions Judge

  7. 17-Jan-2026

    Evidence

    District and Sessions Judge

  8. 12-Dec-2025

    Evidence

    District and Sessions Judge

  9. 19-Nov-2025

    Evidence

    District and Sessions Judge

  10. 29-Oct-2025

    Evidence

    District and Sessions Judge

  11. 08-Oct-2025

    Evidence

    District and Sessions Judge

  12. 16-Sep-2025

    Evidence

    District and Sessions Judge

  13. 11-Aug-2025

    Evidence

    District and Sessions Judge

  14. 28-Jul-2025

    Evidence

    District and Sessions Judge

  15. 22-Jul-2025

    Evidence

    District and Sessions Judge

  16. 20-Jun-2025

    Evidence

    District and Sessions Judge

  17. 22-May-2025

    Evidence

    District and Sessions Judge

  18. 03-Apr-2025

    Evidence

    District and Sessions Judge

  19. 14-Feb-2025

    Evidence

    District and Sessions Judge

  20. 19-Dec-2024

    Evidence

    District and Sessions Judge

  21. 23-Oct-2024

    Evidence

    District and Sessions Judge

  22. 19-Sep-2024

    Evidence

    District and Sessions Judge

  23. 26-Jul-2024

    Evidence

    District and Sessions Judge

  24. 11-Jun-2024

    Evidence

    District and Sessions Judge

  25. 15-Apr-2024

    Evidence

    District and Sessions Judge

  26. 12-Feb-2024

    Evidence

    District and Sessions Judge

  27. 05-Dec-2023

    Evidence

    District and Sessions Judge

  28. 19-Sep-2023

    Evidence

    District and Sessions Judge

  29. 31-Aug-2023

    Appearence

    District and Sessions Judge

  30. 14-Aug-2023

    Appearence

    District and Sessions Judge

  31. 15-Jun-2023

    Appearence

    District and Sessions Judge

  32. 16-May-2023

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  33. 15-May-2023

    Case filed

    Registration No. 432/2023

casestatus.in Summary

Court Decision Summary The Sessions Judge at Jehanabad acquitted all six accused persons (Rajendra Das, Kapil Das, Vinay Das, Bachchu Das, Manoranjan Das, and Radha Devi) of charges under IPC sections 307/34, 341/34, and 504/34, finding that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. Key witnesses, including the informant and injured parties, admitted during cross-examination that they did not witness the alleged assault and could not identify the assailants, while also stating the case had been compromised. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case