STATE OF MAHARASHTRA vs Majhar Najar Sayyad Advocate - Syed N.S. — 15/2024
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 498[a],323,504,506,34IPC. Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 07th May 2026.
R.C.C. - Regular Criminal Case
CNR: MHBI090000182024
Filing Number
18/2024
Filing Date
04-01-2024
Registration No
15/2024
Registration Date
08-01-2024
Court
Civil Court Junior Division , Majalgaon
Judge
4-JOINT JMFC, MAJALGAON.
Decision Date
07th May 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ACQUITTED
FIR Details
FIR Number
319
Police Station
Majalgaon City Police Station
Year
2023
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
Majhar Najar Sayyad Advocate - Syed N.S.
Ajahar Najar Sayyad
Sayyad Abujar Azhar
Shamim Ajahar Sayyad
Parwin Ashraf Sayyad
Trhrabee Najar Sayyad
Shaikh Tehsin Farid
Hearing History
Judge: 4-JOINT JMFC, MAJALGAON.
Disposed
Statement U/sec.313 Cr.P.C.
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 07-05-2026 | Disposed |
| 16-04-2026 | Statement U/sec.313 Cr.P.C. |
| 06-04-2026 | Evidence |
| 25-03-2026 | Evidence |
| 12-03-2026 | Evidence |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary The Majalgaon First Class Judicial Magistrate Court acquitted all seven accused persons of charges under IPC Sections 498-A (cruelty to wife), 323 (voluntarily causing hurt), 504 (insulting modesty), 506 (criminal intimidation) read with Section 34 (common intention). The court found that the prosecution's case relied solely on the complaint statement without corroborating evidence, and the single prosecution witness could not substantiate the allegations of dowry harassment, physical abuse, or threats made against the bride after her marriage in December 2017. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary The Majalgaon First Class Judicial Magistrate Court acquitted all seven accused persons of charges under IPC Sections 498-A (cruelty to wife), 323 (voluntarily causing hurt), 504 (insulting modesty), 506 (criminal intimidation) read with Section 34 (common intention). The court found that the prosecution's case relied solely on the complaint statement without corroborating evidence, and the single prosecution witness could not substantiate the allegations of dowry harassment, physical abuse, or threats made against the bride after her marriage in December 2017. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts