Mysuru Women PS vs Kizar Ahmed — 2111/2022

Case under Indian Penal Code Section U/S,498A,504,506,of,IPC. Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 07th March 2026.

Case disposed

C.C. - CRIMINAL CASES

CNR: KAMS700038262022

Filing Number

2113/2022

Filing Date

01-Dec-2022

Registration No

2111/2022

Registration Date

01-Dec-2022

Court

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, TIRUMAKUDAL NARSIPURA

Judge

553-Senior CIVIL Judge Tirumakudal Narasipur

Decision Date

07-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ACQUITTED

Last updated 09-Apr-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

13

Police Station

WOMEN PS,MYSURU RURAL

Year

2022

Acts & Sections

Indian Penal Code Section U/S,498A,504,506,of,IPC

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Mysuru Women PS (Police Station)

    Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Kizar Ahmed

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 07-Mar-2026

    Judgment

    Summary The court acquitted Kizar Ahamed of charges under IPC Sections 498-A, 504, 506 (dowry harassment, insult, and criminal threat) and Dowry Prohibition Act Sections 3, 4, 6. The key reasoning was that the sole prosecution witness (P.W.1), who was the first informant and the alleged victim, completely denied the prosecution's case both in examination and cross-examination, leaving no credible evidence to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 07-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Senior CIVIL Judge Tirumakudal Narasipur

  4. 16-Feb-2026

    Deposition

  5. 16-Feb-2026

    Deposition

  6. 16-Feb-2026

    For Compliance

    Senior CIVIL Judge Tirumakudal Narasipur

  7. 06-Feb-2026

    Evidence

    Senior CIVIL Judge Tirumakudal Narasipur

  8. 03-Jan-2026

    Evidence

    Senior CIVIL Judge Tirumakudal Narasipur

  9. 22-Dec-2025

    Evidence

    Senior CIVIL Judge Tirumakudal Narasipur

  10. 06-Dec-2025

    Evidence

    Senior CIVIL Judge Tirumakudal Narasipur

  11. 07-Nov-2025

    Evidence

    Senior CIVIL Judge Tirumakudal Narasipur

  12. 31-Oct-2025

    Evidence

    Senior CIVIL Judge Tirumakudal Narasipur

  13. 16-Oct-2025

    Evidence

    Senior CIVIL Judge Tirumakudal Narasipur

  14. 12-Sep-2025

    Evidence

    Senior CIVIL Judge Tirumakudal Narasipur

  15. 27-Jun-2025

    Evidence

    Senior CIVIL Judge Tirumakudal Narasipur

  16. 04-Apr-2025

    Evidence

    Senior CIVIL Judge Tirumakudal Narasipur

  17. 14-Feb-2025

    Evidence

    Senior CIVIL Judge Tirumakudal Narasipur

  18. 20-Dec-2024

    Evidence

    Senior CIVIL Judge Tirumakudal Narasipur

  19. 19-Oct-2024

    Evidence

    Senior CIVIL Judge Tirumakudal Narasipur

  20. 31-Aug-2024

    Evidence

    Senior CIVIL Judge Tirumakudal Narasipur

  21. 17-Aug-2024

    Evidence

    Senior CIVIL Judge Tirumakudal Narasipur

  22. 07-Jun-2024

    Evidence

    Senior CIVIL Judge Tirumakudal Narasipur

  23. 30-Mar-2024

    Evidence

    Senior CIVIL Judge Tirumakudal Narasipur

  24. 30-Dec-2023

    Evidence

    Senior CIVIL Judge Tirumakudal Narasipur

  25. 07-Oct-2023

    Evidence

    Senior CIVIL Judge Tirumakudal Narasipur

  26. 05-Jul-2023

    Charge

  27. 05-Jul-2023

    Evidence

    Senior CIVIL Judge Tirumakudal Narasipur

  28. 11-May-2023

    For Amendment Plantiff/Pet

    Senior CIVIL Judge Tirumakudal Narasipur

  29. 09-May-2023

    NBW

    Senior CIVIL Judge Tirumakudal Narasipur

  30. 15-Mar-2023

    NBW

    Senior CIVIL Judge Tirumakudal Narasipur

  31. 28-Dec-2022

    Hearing Before Charge

    Senior CIVIL Judge Tirumakudal Narasipur

  32. 01-Dec-2022

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  33. 01-Dec-2022

    Case filed

    Registration No. 2111/2022

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The court acquitted Kizar Ahamed of charges under IPC Sections 498-A, 504, 506 (dowry harassment, insult, and criminal threat) and Dowry Prohibition Act Sections 3, 4, 6. The key reasoning was that the sole prosecution witness (P.W.1), who was the first informant and the alleged victim, completely denied the prosecution's case both in examination and cross-examination, leaving no credible evidence to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case