State of Bihar vs ARVIND YADAV — 549/2024
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 341,323,326,307,379,504,506,34. Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 17th April 2026.
SESSION CASE
CNR: BRJE010089352024
Filing Number
549/2024
Filing Date
07-10-2024
Registration No
549/2024
Registration Date
07-10-2024
Court
Jehanabad DJ Div
Judge
1-District and Sessions Judge
Decision Date
17th April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ACQUITTED
FIR Details
FIR Number
133
Police Station
KAKO
Year
2021
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State of Bihar
Adv. P.P
Respondent(s)
ARVIND YADAV
DHANANJAY KUMAR
CHANDAN KUMAR
Hearing History
Judge: 1-District and Sessions Judge
Disposed
ARGUMENTS
STATEMENT U/S.313 CR.P.C.
STATEMENT U/S.313 CR.P.C.
EVIDENCE
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 17-04-2026 | Disposed |
| 16-04-2026 | ARGUMENTS |
| 24-03-2026 | STATEMENT U/S.313 CR.P.C. |
| 19-03-2026 | STATEMENT U/S.313 CR.P.C. |
| 11-03-2026 | EVIDENCE |
Final Orders / Judgements
SUMMARY: The Sessions Judge, Jehanabad acquitted all three accused persons—Arvind Yadav, Dhananjay Kumar, and Chandan Kumar—of charges under IPC sections 307/34, 341/34, 504/34, and 379 (attempt to murder, wrongful restraint, criminal intimidation, and theft). The court found that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, as the informant admitted giving the accused's names based on mere suspicion and later compromised the case; three out of five prosecution witnesses turned hostile and confirmed they could not identify the attackers due to darkness at the time of the night incident. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
SUMMARY: The Sessions Judge, Jehanabad acquitted all three accused persons—Arvind Yadav, Dhananjay Kumar, and Chandan Kumar—of charges under IPC sections 307/34, 341/34, 504/34, and 379 (attempt to murder, wrongful restraint, criminal intimidation, and theft). The court found that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, as the informant admitted giving the accused's names based on mere suspicion and later compromised the case; three out of five prosecution witnesses turned hostile and confirmed they could not identify the attackers due to darkness at the time of the night incident. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts