State vs VIKASH BHATT — 2228/2023
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 406,498a. Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 17th April 2026.
Cr. Reg. Case - CR. REGULAR
CNR: RJAJ180043432023
Filing Number
4343/2023
Filing Date
01-Nov-2023
Registration No
2228/2023
Registration Date
01-Nov-2023
Court
ACJM JM KISHANGARH TALUKA CRIMINAL
Judge
4-Jm Add Court
Decision Date
17-Apr-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Acquitted
Last updated 07-Jun-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
209
Police Station
Kishangarh
Year
2023
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.State
Adv. APO
Respondent(s)
-
1.VIKASH BHATT
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
17-Apr-2026
JudgementView PDF
Case Summary: State v. Vikash Bhatt (CIS 2228/2023) The court acquitted Vikash Bhatt of charges under IPC Section 498A (cruelty to wife) and the Dowry Prohibition Act Section 4/6, finding the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. All three prosecution witnesses, including the complainant wife herself, retracted their allegations during cross-examination, testifying instead that marital discord arose from incompatibility, not dowry demands or harassment. The court noted the couple subsequently reconciled and obtained a mutual divorce settlement. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
17-Apr-2026
Disposed
Jm Add Court
-
13-Mar-2026
Prosecution Evidence
Jm Add Court
-
15-Nov-2025
Prosecution Evidence
Jm Add Court
-
28-May-2025
Framing of Charge/ Plea
Jm Add Court
-
07-Dec-2024
Framing of Charge/ Plea
Jm Add Court
-
21-Sep-2024
Framing of Charge/ Plea
Jm Add Court
-
01-Jun-2024
Framing of Charge/ Plea
Jm Add Court
-
18-May-2024
Framing of Charge/ Plea
Jm Add Court
-
19-Dec-2023
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
01-Nov-2023
Case filed
Registration No. 2228/2023
Case Summary: State v. Vikash Bhatt (CIS 2228/2023) The court acquitted Vikash Bhatt of charges under IPC Section 498A (cruelty to wife) and the Dowry Prohibition Act Section 4/6, finding the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. All three prosecution witnesses, including the complainant wife herself, retracted their allegations during cross-examination, testifying instead that marital discord arose from incompatibility, not dowry demands or harassment. The court noted the couple subsequently reconciled and obtained a mutual divorce settlement. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts