The PSI, Aland PS vs Sandipa s/o pandu Rathoda, Age 25 yrs, R/o ,Apte tanda,tq alandKalaburagi, Karnataka — 2413/2025
Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 352,351(2),115(2),118(1),3(5). Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 11th March 2026.
C.C. - CRIMINAL CASES
CNR: KAKB220039832025
e-Filing Number
26-06-2025
Filing Number
2413/2025
Filing Date
26-06-2025
Registration No
2413/2025
Registration Date
26-06-2025
Court
PRL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, ALAND
Judge
324-PRL. CIVIL JUDGE JMFC,Aland
Decision Date
11th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ACQUITTED
FIR Details
FIR Number
0264
Police Station
ALAND PS
Year
2024
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
The PSI, Aland PS (Police Station)
Adv. Shri. Ismail Patel APP
Respondent(s)
Sandipa s/o pandu Rathoda, Age 25 yrs, R/o ,Apte tanda,tq alandKalaburagi, Karnataka
Dhanaraj s/o heera pawar Age 28 yrs, R/o ,Apte tanda village,tq alandKalaburagi, Karnataka
Adv. null
Viswanath s/o heera pawar Age 34 R/o ,Apte tanda,TQ ALANDKalaburagi, Karnataka
Adv. null
Hearing History
Judge: 324-PRL. CIVIL JUDGE JMFC,Aland
Disposed
JUDGMENTS
EVIDENCE
FRAMING OF CHARGE OR PLEA
APPEARANCE OF ACCUSSED
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 11-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 10-03-2026 | JUDGMENTS | |
| 07-03-2026 | EVIDENCE | |
| 26-02-2026 | FRAMING OF CHARGE OR PLEA | |
| 22-01-2026 | APPEARANCE OF ACCUSSED |
Final Orders / Judgements
SUMMARY The court acquitted all three accused persons (Sandeep, Dhanaraj, and Vishwanath) of charges under sections 352, 351(2), 115(2), and 118(1) BNS (assault, criminal intimidation, and provocation). The judge found that the sole prosecution witness—the complainant himself—turned hostile and testified that the accused never assaulted or threatened him, fatally undermining the prosecution's case and warranting acquittal under benefit of doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
SUMMARY The court acquitted all three accused persons (Sandeep, Dhanaraj, and Vishwanath) of charges under sections 352, 351(2), 115(2), and 118(1) BNS (assault, criminal intimidation, and provocation). The judge found that the sole prosecution witness—the complainant himself—turned hostile and testified that the accused never assaulted or threatened him, fatally undermining the prosecution's case and warranting acquittal under benefit of doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts