STATE vs PARDEEP SAXENA — 467/2022
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 308. Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 14th March 2026.
SC - SESSIONS CASE
CNR: DLNT010051512022
Filing Number
2533/2022
Filing Date
26-May-2022
Registration No
467/2022
Registration Date
07-Jun-2022
Court
District and Sessions Judge, North, RHC
Judge
431-Additional Sessions Judge
Decision Date
14-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ACQUITTED
Last updated 07-Jun-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
91
Police Station
Bhalswa Dairy
Year
2019
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.STATE
Respondent(s)
-
1.PARDEEP SAXENA
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
14-Mar-2026
Copy Of Judicial ProceedingsView PDF
-
14-Mar-2026
Copy Of JudgmentView PDF
Case Summary: State v. Pardeep Saxena (SC 467/2022) The Delhi Sessions Court acquitted Pardeep Saxena of charges under Section 308 IPC (rash or negligent act causing hurt), finding material contradictions in the complainant's testimony, faulty investigation procedures, and lack of credible evidence. The court noted the victim's complaint description differed substantially from his court testimony regarding the incident location and circumstances, the weapon was recovered unsealed without proper documentation, no independent witnesses were present, and no forensic evidence connected the accused to the alleged offense. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
14-Mar-2026
Disposed
Additional Sessions Judge
-
12-Mar-2026
Copy Of Judicial ProceedingsView PDF
-
12-Mar-2026
Final Arguments
Additional Sessions Judge
-
05-Feb-2026
Copy Of Judicial ProceedingsView PDF
-
05-Feb-2026
Statement of Accused
Additional Sessions Judge
-
13-Nov-2025
Copy Of Judicial ProceedingsView PDF
-
13-Nov-2025
Prosecution Evidence
Additional Sessions Judge
-
07-Aug-2025
Prosecution Evidence
Additional Sessions Judge
-
17-Jul-2025
Copy Of Judicial ProceedingsView PDF
-
17-Jul-2025
Prosecution Evidence
Additional Sessions Judge
-
05-Jun-2025
Copy Of Judicial ProceedingsView PDF
-
06-Mar-2025
Prosecution Evidence
Additional Sessions Judge
-
21-Nov-2024
Prosecution Evidence
Additional Sessions Judge
-
07-Nov-2024
Copy Of Judicial ProceedingsView PDF
-
05-Oct-2024
Copy Of Judicial ProceedingsView PDF
-
10-Sep-2024
Copy Of Judicial ProceedingsView PDF
-
30-Aug-2024
Copy Of Judicial ProceedingsView PDF
-
29-Aug-2024
Prosecution Evidence
Additional Sessions Judge
-
18-Apr-2024
Prosecution Evidence
Additional Sessions Judge
-
21-Mar-2024
Copy Of Judicial ProceedingsView PDF
-
21-Mar-2024
Prosecution Evidence
Additional Sessions Judge
-
11-Jan-2024
Copy Of Judicial ProceedingsView PDF
-
11-Jan-2024
Prosecution Evidence
Additional Sessions Judge
-
14-Dec-2023
Copy Of Judicial ProceedingsView PDF
-
14-Dec-2023
Prosecution Evidence
Additional Sessions Judge
-
12-Oct-2023
Copy Of Judicial ProceedingsView PDF
-
12-Oct-2023
Prosecution Evidence
Additional Sessions Judge
-
10-Aug-2023
Copy Of Judicial ProceedingsView PDF
-
10-Aug-2023
Prosecution Evidence
Additional Sessions Judge
-
11-May-2023
Prosecution Evidence
Additional Sessions Judge
-
01-Mar-2023
Prosecution Evidence
Additional Sessions Judge
-
21-Dec-2022
Copy Of Judicial ProceedingsView PDF
-
21-Dec-2022
Prosecution Evidence
Additional Sessions Judge
-
04-Nov-2022
Copy Of Judicial ProceedingsView PDF
-
04-Nov-2022
Prosecution Evidence
Additional Sessions Judge
-
02-Sep-2022
Arguments On Charge
Additional Sessions Judge
-
07-Jun-2022
Copy Of Judicial ProceedingsView PDF
-
07-Jun-2022
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
26-May-2022
Case filed
Registration No. 467/2022
Case Summary: State v. Pardeep Saxena (SC 467/2022) The Delhi Sessions Court acquitted Pardeep Saxena of charges under Section 308 IPC (rash or negligent act causing hurt), finding material contradictions in the complainant's testimony, faulty investigation procedures, and lack of credible evidence. The court noted the victim's complaint description differed substantially from his court testimony regarding the incident location and circumstances, the weapon was recovered unsealed without proper documentation, no independent witnesses were present, and no forensic evidence connected the accused to the alleged offense. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts