State Govt. vs Mehar Singh Advocate - Sh. Krishan Kumar Sharma — 2509/2016
Case under Code of Criminal Procedure Section 323,341,451,34. Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 06th April 2026.
Cr.reg. - Cr.Regular
CNR: RJAL230003132016
Filing Number
1503/2016
Filing Date
21-11-2016
Registration No
2509/2016
Registration Date
21-11-2016
Court
CJ JM Thanagazi
Judge
1-Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate
Decision Date
06th April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Acquitted
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State Govt.
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
Mehar Singh Advocate - Sh. Krishan Kumar Sharma
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate
Disposed
Prosecution Evidence
Prosecution Evidence
Prosecution Evidence
Prosecution Evidence
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 06-04-2026 | Disposed |
| 04-04-2026 | Prosecution Evidence |
| 28-03-2026 | Prosecution Evidence |
| 23-03-2026 | Prosecution Evidence |
| 18-03-2026 | Prosecution Evidence |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: 2509/2016 Court Decision: The accused, Mehar Singh and Ramottar (Lalaram), were acquitted of charges under IPC Sections 323, 341, 451, and 34 due to insufficient evidence. The prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt that the accused committed house trespass and assault on the night of September 10, 2016. Key Reasoning: Despite the complainant's FIR and medical evidence of injuries to family members, the court found critical inconsistencies in witness testimonies. Witnesses could not identify all perpetrators, were uncertain about the incident date/time due to darkness, and provided conflicting accounts. The court concluded the prosecution's evidence was circumstantial and could not conclusively establish the accused's guilt with certainty required for conviction. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: 2509/2016 Court Decision: The accused, Mehar Singh and Ramottar (Lalaram), were acquitted of charges under IPC Sections 323, 341, 451, and 34 due to insufficient evidence. The prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt that the accused committed house trespass and assault on the night of September 10, 2016. Key Reasoning: Despite the complainant's FIR and medical evidence of injuries to family members, the court found critical inconsistencies in witness testimonies. Witnesses could not identify all perpetrators, were uncertain about the incident date/time due to darkness, and provided conflicting accounts. The court concluded the prosecution's evidence was circumstantial and could not conclusively establish the accused's guilt with certainty required for conviction. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts