STATE vs ILIYAS ETC Advocate - KAN SINGH CHOHAN — 12/2019

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 147,148,341,328,324,326,329,307/149. Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 30th May 2026.

Case disposed

Session Case

CNR: RJBA010000752019

Filing Number

28/2019

Filing Date

25-Jan-2019

Registration No

12/2019

Registration Date

25-Jan-2019

Court

DJ ADJ Balotra District HQ

Judge

1-District and Sessions Judge

Decision Date

30-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Acquitted

Last updated 07-Jun-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

342

Police Station

BALOTRA POLICE STATION

Year

2018

Acts & Sections

Indian Penal Code Section 147,148,341,328,324,326,329,307/149
Arms Act Section 4/25

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.STATE

    Adv. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.ILIYAS ETC Advocate - KAN SINGH CHOHAN

  2. 2.HAIDAR

    Adv. KAN SINGH CHOHAN

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 30-May-2026

    JudgementView PDF

    Case Summary: State v. Iliyas and Haidar Case Number: 06/2019 (CIS 12/2019) Court: Session Court, Balotra, Rajasthan Judge: M.R. Suthar (RJS) Date of Decision: 30.05.2026 Court's Decision The court acquitted both accused Iliyas and Haidar of murder charges under IPC Sections 302, 201/34, holding the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt despite circumstantial evidence. Key Facts A young man, Mehbub (son of Musa Khan), was found murdered in a field near Balotra on September 10, 2018, with severe head injuries and a deep chest wound. The accused were arrested ~45 days later after police claimed they confessed during interrogation and led police to sites where they allegedly hid evidence. Critical Issues Why Acquittal? 1. Weak Circumstantial Evidence: No eyewitness testimony; case rested entirely on circumstantial evidence which requires an unbreakable chain 2. Motive Absent: Prosecution proved no motive or prior dispute between accused and victim 3. Questionable Recovery: Clothes/shoes recovered 45 days post-crime with alleged bloodstains, yet: - No proof blood matched victim's blood group - Highly implausible accused preserved crime evidence for 45 days 4. Victim's Family Testimony: Victim's brothers (PW01, PW02, PW03) testified they suspected no one; stated accused didn't kill Mehbub 5. Insufficient Forensics: FSL reports didn't conclusively match blood samples to victim 6. No Custody Evidence: No recovery from accused's possession except clothes/shoes found days later 7. Recovery of Vehicle Questionable: Motorcycle allegedly recovered didn't belong to accused The court noted that in circumstantial evidence cases, motive is crucial to establish guilt, and prosecution's failure to prove any animosity between accused and victim was fatal to the case. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 30-May-2026

    Disposed

    District and Sessions Judge

  4. 25-May-2026

    Final arguments

    District and Sessions Judge

  5. 19-May-2026

    Final arguments

    District and Sessions Judge

  6. 18-May-2026

    Examination of accused u/s. 313 Cr.P.C.

    District and Sessions Judge

  7. 16-May-2026

    Prosecution Evidence

    District and Sessions Judge

  8. 08-May-2026

    Prosecution Evidence

    District and Sessions Judge

  9. 27-Apr-2026

    Prosecution Evidence

    District and Sessions Judge

  10. 16-Apr-2026

    Prosecution Evidence

    District and Sessions Judge

  11. 02-Apr-2026

    Prosecution Evidence

    District and Sessions Judge

  12. 01-Apr-2026

    Prosecution Evidence

    District and Sessions Judge

  13. 16-Mar-2026

    Prosecution Evidence

    District and Sessions Judge

  14. 13-Mar-2026

    Prosecution Evidence

    District and Sessions Judge

  15. 24-Feb-2026

    Prosecution Evidence

    District and Sessions Judge

  16. 16-Feb-2026

    Prosecution Evidence

    District and Sessions Judge

  17. 02-Jan-2026

    Prosecution Evidence

    District and Sessions Judge

  18. 27-Oct-2025

    Prosecution Evidence

    District and Sessions Judge

  19. 15-Sep-2025

    Appearance of accused

    District and Sessions Judge

  20. 15-Jul-2025

    Appearance of accused

    District and Sessions Judge

  21. 03-Jun-2025

    Prosecution Evidence

    District and Sessions Judge

  22. 05-May-2025

    Prosecution Evidence

    District and Sessions Judge

  23. 03-Mar-2025

    Prosecution Evidence

    District and Sessions Judge

  24. 04-Jan-2025

    Prosecution Evidence

    District and Sessions Judge

  25. 04-Dec-2024

    Prosecution Evidence

    District and Sessions Judge

  26. 07-Oct-2024

    Prosecution Evidence

    District and Sessions Judge

  27. 21-Aug-2024

    Prosecution Evidence

    District and Sessions Judge

  28. 18-Jul-2024

    Prosecution Evidence

    District and Sessions Judge

  29. 15-Jun-2024

    Prosecution Evidence

    District and Sessions Judge

  30. 01-May-2024

    Prosecution Evidence

    District and Sessions Judge

  31. 29-Apr-2024

    Prosecution Evidence

    District and Sessions Judge

  32. 26-Apr-2024

    Prosecution Evidence

    District and Sessions Judge

  33. 12-Mar-2024

    Prosecution Evidence

    District and Sessions Judge

  34. 29-Jan-2024

    Prosecution Evidence

    District and Sessions Judge

  35. 02-Jan-2024

    Prosecution Evidence

    District and Sessions Judge

  36. 06-Nov-2023

    Prosecution Evidence

    District and Sessions Judge

  37. 18-Sep-2023

    Prosecution Evidence

    District and Sessions Judge

  38. 21-Aug-2023

    Prosecution Evidence

    District and Sessions Judge

  39. 28-Jul-2023

    Prosecution Evidence

    District and Sessions Judge

  40. 27-Jul-2023

    Prosecution Evidence

    District and Sessions Judge

  41. 25-Jul-2023

    Prosecution Evidence

    District and Sessions Judge

  42. 03-Jun-2023

    Prosecution Evidence

    District and Sessions Judge

  43. 01-May-2023

    Hearing arguments on Charge

    District and Sessions Judge

  44. 28-Feb-2023

    Hearing arguments on Charge

    District and Sessions Judge

  45. 10-Jan-2023

    Hearing arguments on Charge

    District and Sessions Judge

  46. 13-Dec-2022

    Hearing arguments on Charge

    District and Sessions Judge

  47. 07-Oct-2022

    Hearing arguments on Charge

    District and Sessions Judge

  48. 17-Sep-2022

    Hearing arguments on Charge

    District and Sessions Judge

  49. 18-Jun-2022

    Hearing arguments on Charge

  50. 29-Apr-2022

    Hearing arguments on Charge

    District and Sessions Judge

  51. 04-Mar-2022

    Hearing arguments on Charge

    District and Sessions Judge

  52. 16-Dec-2021

    Hearing arguments on Charge

    District and Sessions Judge

  53. 23-Nov-2021

    Hearing arguments on Charge

    District and Sessions Judge

  54. 17-Sep-2021

    Hearing arguments on Charge

    District and Sessions Judge

  55. 26-Jul-2021

    Hearing arguments on Charge

    District and Sessions Judge

  56. 04-Jun-2021

    Hearing arguments on Charge

    District and Sessions Judge

  57. 30-Mar-2021

    Hearing arguments on Charge

    District and Sessions Judge

  58. 30-Jan-2021

    Hearing arguments on Charge

    District and Sessions Judge

  59. 26-Nov-2020

    Hearing arguments on Charge

    District and Sessions Judge

  60. 18-Sep-2020

    Hearing arguments on Charge

    District and Sessions Judge

  61. 20-Jul-2020

    Hearing arguments on Charge

    District and Sessions Judge

  62. 19-Jun-2020

    Hearing arguments on Charge

    District and Sessions Judge

  63. 19-May-2020

    Hearing arguments on Charge

    District and Sessions Judge

  64. 18-Apr-2020

    Hearing arguments on Charge

    District and Sessions Judge

  65. 13-Mar-2020

    Hearing arguments on Charge

  66. 29-Feb-2020

    Hearing arguments on Charge

    District and Sessions Judge

  67. 18-Jan-2020

    Hearing arguments on Charge

    District and Sessions Judge

  68. 06-Dec-2019

    Hearing arguments on Charge

    District and Sessions Judge

  69. 01-Nov-2019

    Hearing arguments on Charge

    District and Sessions Judge

  70. 27-Sep-2019

    Hearing arguments on Charge

    District and Sessions Judge

  71. 22-Aug-2019

    Hearing arguments on Charge

    District and Sessions Judge

  72. 18-Jul-2019

    Hearing arguments on Charge

    District and Sessions Judge

  73. 31-May-2019

    Hearing arguments on Charge

    District and Sessions Judge

  74. 30-Mar-2019

    Hearing arguments on Charge

    District and Sessions Judge

  75. 28-Feb-2019

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  76. 25-Jan-2019

    Case filed

    Registration No. 12/2019

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: State v. Iliyas and Haidar Case Number: 06/2019 (CIS 12/2019) Court: Session Court, Balotra, Rajasthan Judge: M.R. Suthar (RJS) Date of Decision: 30.05.2026 Court's Decision The court acquitted both accused Iliyas and Haidar of murder charges under IPC Sections 302, 201/34, holding the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt despite circumstantial evidence. Key Facts A young man, Mehbub (son of Musa Khan), was found murdered in a field near Balotra on September 10, 2018, with severe head injuries and a deep chest wound. The accused were arrested ~45 days later after police claimed they confessed during interrogation and led police to sites where they allegedly hid evidence. Critical Issues Why Acquittal? 1. Weak Circumstantial Evidence: No eyewitness testimony; case rested entirely on circumstantial evidence which requires an unbreakable chain 2. Motive Absent: Prosecution proved no motive or prior dispute between accused and victim 3. Questionable Recovery: Clothes/shoes recovered 45 days post-crime with alleged bloodstains, yet: - No proof blood matched victim's blood group - Highly implausible accused preserved crime evidence for 45 days 4. Victim's Family Testimony: Victim's brothers (PW01, PW02, PW03) testified they suspected no one; stated accused didn't kill Mehbub 5. Insufficient Forensics: FSL reports didn't conclusively match blood samples to victim 6. No Custody Evidence: No recovery from accused's possession except clothes/shoes found days later 7. Recovery of Vehicle Questionable: Motorcycle allegedly recovered didn't belong to accused The court noted that in circumstantial evidence cases, motive is crucial to establish guilt, and prosecution's failure to prove any animosity between accused and victim was fatal to the case. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case