UMESH SAHNI vs SOMARI DEVI — 77/2023

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 147,149,323,325,341,342,307,504,. Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 09th March 2026.

SESSION CASE

CNR: BRSO010018702023

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

1866/2023

Filing Date

10-05-2023

Registration No

77/2023

Registration Date

10-05-2023

Court

Sheohar DJ Div.

Judge

1-Principal District and Sessions Judge

Decision Date

09th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ACQUITTED

FIR Details

FIR Number

42

Police Station

SHYAMPUR BHATAHA

Year

2021

Acts & Sections

Indian Penal Code Section 147,149,323,325,341,342,307,504,

Petitioner(s)

UMESH SAHNI

Adv. Suresh Roy P.P

Respondent(s)

SOMARI DEVI

UMA SHANKAR SAHNI@ UMA SAHNI

MAHESH SAHNI

SANJIT KUMAR@SANJIT SAHNI

VIRENDRA SHANI

SHATRUDHAN SAHNI

RAJMANGAL SAHNI

UPENDRA SAHNI

BHAJAN SAHNI

VINOD SAHNI

Hearing History

Judge: 1-Principal District and Sessions Judge

09-03-2026

Disposed

02-02-2026

JUDGEMENT

22-01-2026

ARGUMENTS

13-01-2026

DEFENCE EVIDENCE

23-12-2025

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

Final Orders / Judgements

09-03-2026
Judgment

Case Summary State v. Somari Devi & Others (Sessions Trial No. 77/2023, Sheohar District Court, 09.03.2026) The court acquitted all ten accused persons of charges under Sections 147, 307/149, 323/149, 341/149, 342/149, 504/149, and 325/149 IPC. The prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt because three key witnesses (including the informant) turned hostile and retracted their allegations, most victims couldn't identify the perpetrators due to covered faces, and parties had already reached an amicable settlement. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary State v. Somari Devi & Others (Sessions Trial No. 77/2023, Sheohar District Court, 09.03.2026) The court acquitted all ten accused persons of charges under Sections 147, 307/149, 323/149, 341/149, 342/149, 504/149, and 325/149 IPC. The prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt because three key witnesses (including the informant) turned hostile and retracted their allegations, most victims couldn't identify the perpetrators due to covered faces, and parties had already reached an amicable settlement. 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

Sheohar DJ Div. All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case