STATE vs DHIRENDER PRASAD Advocate - Rahul Senapathi, Tariq Hashmi, DCLADC, Tariq Hashmi, DCLADCRahul Senapathi, — 67/2021
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 323,341,506. Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 14th March 2026.
SC - SESSIONS CASE
CNR: DLST010018082021
Filing Number
659/2021
Filing Date
15-02-2021
Registration No
67/2021
Registration Date
15-02-2021
Court
District and Sessions Judge, South , Saket
Judge
6-Additional Sessions Judge-02
Decision Date
14th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ACQUITTED
FIR Details
FIR Number
274
Police Station
Maidan Garhi
Year
2020
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
STATE
Adv. Tariq Hashmi, DCLADC for complainant
Respondent(s)
DHIRENDER PRASAD Advocate - Rahul Senapathi, Tariq Hashmi, DCLADC, Tariq Hashmi, DCLADCRahul Senapathi,
Hearing History
Judge: 6-Additional Sessions Judge-02
Disposed
Misc./ Appearance (Criminal)
Misc./ Appearance (Criminal)
JUDGEMENT (Criminal)
Final Arguments (Criminal)
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 14-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 12-03-2026 | Misc./ Appearance (Criminal) |
| 07-03-2026 | Misc./ Appearance (Criminal) |
| 23-02-2026 | JUDGEMENT (Criminal) |
| 13-02-2026 | Final Arguments (Criminal) |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: State v. Dhirender Prasad (Session Case 67/2021) Court Decision: The accused Dhirender Prasad was acquitted of all charges under Sections 341, 323, 506 IPC and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. Key Reasoning: The court found reasonable doubt in the prosecution's case due to: (1) absence of independent neutral witnesses despite the alleged public place incident; (2) all key witnesses being known to the complainant from the same locality; (3) eight-day delay in FIR registration without satisfactory explanation; (4) no clear motive for the accused's alleged conduct; (5) one prosecution eyewitness (PW-4) contradicting the case by denying the incident occurred; and (6) credible defense explanation suggesting the incident arose from a monetary dispute between the accused and witness PW-3. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: State v. Dhirender Prasad (Session Case 67/2021) Court Decision: The accused Dhirender Prasad was acquitted of all charges under Sections 341, 323, 506 IPC and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. Key Reasoning: The court found reasonable doubt in the prosecution's case due to: (1) absence of independent neutral witnesses despite the alleged public place incident; (2) all key witnesses being known to the complainant from the same locality; (3) eight-day delay in FIR registration without satisfactory explanation; (4) no clear motive for the accused's alleged conduct; (5) one prosecution eyewitness (PW-4) contradicting the case by denying the incident occurred; and (6) credible defense explanation suggesting the incident arose from a monetary dispute between the accused and witness PW-3. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts