STATE vs VIVEK KUMAR AND ANR. — 31/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 109(1),238(a),3(5). Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 07th April 2026.
SC - SESSIONS CASE
CNR: DLSH010006042026
Filing Number
226/2026
Filing Date
20-08-2025
Registration No
31/2026
Registration Date
28-01-2026
Court
District and Sessions Judge, Shahdara, KKD
Judge
464-Principal District and Sessions Judge - Shahdara District
Decision Date
07th April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ACQUITTED
FIR Details
FIR Number
218
Police Station
Nand Nagari
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
STATE
Respondent(s)
VIVEK KUMAR AND ANR.
RAJIV ALIAS GOLI
Hearing History
Judge: 464-Principal District and Sessions Judge - Shahdara District
Disposed
Prosecution Evidence
Prosecution Evidence
Prosecution Evidence
Prosecution Evidence
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 07-04-2026 | Disposed |
| 01-04-2026 | Prosecution Evidence |
| 13-03-2026 | Prosecution Evidence |
| 25-02-2026 | Prosecution Evidence |
| 16-02-2026 | Prosecution Evidence |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: State v. Vivek Kumar and Rajiv @ Goli (31/2026) Accused Vivek and Rajiv @ Goli were charged under Sections 109(1)/238(a) read with Section 3(5) BNS for allegedly stabbing complainant Mukesh with knives in April 2025. The court acquitted both accused, finding the prosecution failed to establish guilt because the complainant—the key witness—turned hostile during trial, refused to identify the accused as assailants, and disowned his initial statement, while other prosecution witnesses provided only formal procedural evidence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
Case Summary: State v. Vivek Kumar and Rajiv @ Goli (31/2026) Accused Vivek and Rajiv @ Goli were charged under Sections 109(1)/238(a) read with Section 3(5) BNS for allegedly stabbing complainant Mukesh with knives in April 2025. The court acquitted both accused, finding the prosecution failed to establish guilt because the complainant—the key witness—turned hostile during trial, refused to identify the accused as assailants, and disowned his initial statement, while other prosecution witnesses provided only formal procedural evidence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts