BHARAT SINGH RATHORE vs STATE Advocate - Additional Proceucation Officer — 363/2023
Case under Code of Criminal Procedure Section 397. Disposed: Contested--Dismissed after Full Trial/Hearing on 25th May 2026.
Cr. Revision
CNR: RJAJ010057032023
Filing Number
3846/2023
Filing Date
04-Dec-2023
Registration No
363/2023
Registration Date
07-Dec-2023
Court
DJ ADJ Ajmer District HQ
Judge
4-Addl District and Sessions Judge III
Decision Date
25-May-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Dismissed after Full Trial/Hearing
Last updated 07-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.BHARAT SINGH RATHORE
Adv. Dharmesh Mehra
Respondent(s)
-
1.STATE Advocate - Additional Proceucation Officer
-
2.simran
Adv. Firoz Khan 3
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
25-May-2026
OrderView PDF
The Session Court (Additional Session Judge, Ajmer) dismissed Bharat Singh Rathore's revision petition challenging an order dated 22.11.2023 by the Magistrate's Court. The court found no illegality in the Magistrate's order, which had rejected Rathore's Section 311 CrPC application to reopen cross-examination after he failed to pay the imposed cost and attend proceedings. The court upheld the lower court's decision, noting that adequate opportunity for cross-examination was already provided and the applicant's non-compliance warranted dismissal of the plea. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
25-May-2026
Disposed
Addl District and Sessions Judge III
-
06-May-2026
Final arguments
Addl District and Sessions Judge III
-
13-Mar-2026
Final arguments
Addl District and Sessions Judge III
-
09-Feb-2026
Final arguments
Addl District and Sessions Judge III
-
08-Dec-2025
Final arguments
Addl District and Sessions Judge III
-
27-Nov-2025
Final arguments
Addl District and Sessions Judge III
-
31-Oct-2025
Final arguments
Addl District and Sessions Judge III
-
06-Sep-2025
Final arguments
Addl District and Sessions Judge III
-
26-Aug-2025
Final arguments
Addl District and Sessions Judge III
-
19-Jul-2025
Final arguments
Addl District and Sessions Judge III
-
27-Jun-2025
Final arguments
Addl District and Sessions Judge III
-
21-Jun-2025
Final arguments
Addl District and Sessions Judge III
-
12-May-2025
Final arguments
Addl District and Sessions Judge III
-
24-Mar-2025
Final arguments
Addl District and Sessions Judge III
-
21-Feb-2025
Final arguments
Addl District and Sessions Judge III
-
10-Feb-2025
Final arguments
Addl District and Sessions Judge III
-
09-Dec-2024
Final arguments
Addl District and Sessions Judge III
-
15-Oct-2024
Final arguments
Addl District and Sessions Judge III
-
14-Oct-2024
Final arguments
Addl District and Sessions Judge III
-
17-Sep-2024
Final arguments
Addl District and Sessions Judge III
-
05-Aug-2024
Final arguments
Addl District and Sessions Judge III
-
18-Jul-2024
Final arguments
Addl District and Sessions Judge III
-
27-Jun-2024
Final arguments
Addl District and Sessions Judge III
-
11-Jun-2024
Final arguments
Addl District and Sessions Judge III
-
05-Jun-2024
Appearance of accused
Addl District and Sessions Judge III
-
06-May-2024
Appearance of accused
Addl District and Sessions Judge III
-
08-Apr-2024
Appearance of accused
Addl District and Sessions Judge III
-
26-Mar-2024
Appearance of accused
Addl District and Sessions Judge III
-
06-Mar-2024
Appearance of accused
Addl District and Sessions Judge III
-
12-Feb-2024
Appearance of accused
Addl District and Sessions Judge III
-
22-Jan-2024
Appearance of accused
Addl District and Sessions Judge III
-
03-Jan-2024
Appearance of accused
Addl District and Sessions Judge III
-
07-Dec-2023
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
04-Dec-2023
Case filed
Registration No. 363/2023
The Session Court (Additional Session Judge, Ajmer) dismissed Bharat Singh Rathore's revision petition challenging an order dated 22.11.2023 by the Magistrate's Court. The court found no illegality in the Magistrate's order, which had rejected Rathore's Section 311 CrPC application to reopen cross-examination after he failed to pay the imposed cost and attend proceedings. The court upheld the lower court's decision, noting that adequate opportunity for cross-examination was already provided and the applicant's non-compliance warranted dismissal of the plea. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts