State vs KAMRUDIN Advocate - GANGAPRASAD — 432/2017

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 279,337,338. Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 06th April 2026.

Cr. Reg. Case - CR. REGULAR

CNR: RJAL160008652017

Case disposed

Filing Number

850/2017

Filing Date

01-03-2016

Registration No

432/2017

Registration Date

01-03-2016

Court

ACJM JM Rajgarh

Judge

3-CJ (JD) JM, Rajgarh

Decision Date

06th April 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Acquitted

FIR Details

FIR Number

17

Police Station

RAJGARH

Year

2016

Acts & Sections

Indian Penal Code Section 279,337,338

Petitioner(s)

State

Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

KAMRUDIN Advocate - GANGAPRASAD

Hearing History

Judge: 3-CJ (JD) JM, Rajgarh

06-04-2026

Disposed

24-03-2026

Prosecution Evidence

16-03-2026

Prosecution Evidence

09-03-2026

Prosecution Evidence

23-02-2026

Prosecution Evidence

Final Orders / Judgements

06-04-2026
Judgement

Case Summary: State v. Kamrudin (Case 432/2017) Court Decision (dated 06.04.2026): The court acquitted accused Kamrudin of charges under IPC Sections 279, 337, and 338 (rash/negligent driving causing hurt). The prosecution failed to establish beyond reasonable doubt that Kamrudin was driving the truck (Rajasthan 29 JF 0692) that collided with the petitioner's motorcycle on 04.01.2016, causing injuries to two girls. No eyewitness identified the truck driver, and the defense relied on the principle that the accused must be proven guilty as the actual driver, not merely assumed. The court found insufficient evidence to prove Kamrudin was operating the vehicle at the time of the accident. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: State v. Kamrudin (Case 432/2017) Court Decision (dated 06.04.2026): The court acquitted accused Kamrudin of charges under IPC Sections 279, 337, and 338 (rash/negligent driving causing hurt). The prosecution failed to establish beyond reasonable doubt that Kamrudin was driving the truck (Rajasthan 29 JF 0692) that collided with the petitioner's motorcycle on 04.01.2016, causing injuries to two girls. No eyewitness identified the truck driver, and the defense relied on the principle that the accused must be proven guilty as the actual driver, not merely assumed. The court found insufficient evidence to prove Kamrudin was operating the vehicle at the time of the accident. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

ACJM JM Rajgarh All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case