Rampal vs State Advocate - Public Prosecutor — 22/2019

Case under Code of Criminal Procedure Section 374. Disposed: Contested--Appeal Allowed, Cross Objection Dismissed on 01st June 2026.

Case disposed

Cr. Appeal

CNR: RJBD010005492019

Filing Number

483/2019

Filing Date

02-Feb-2019

Registration No

22/2019

Registration Date

02-Feb-2019

Court

DJ ADJ Bundi HQ

Judge

1-District and Sessions Judge

Decision Date

01-Jun-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Appeal Allowed, Cross Objection Dismissed

Last updated 07-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Criminal Procedure Section 374

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Rampal

    Adv. N. S. Gaur

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.State Advocate - Public Prosecutor

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 01-Jun-2026

    JudgementView PDF

    Case Summary: 22/2019 - Rampal v. State of Rajasthan Decision (June 1, 2026): The Session Court acquitted appellant Rampal of charges under IPC Sections 498-A (cruelty to wife) and 406 (criminal breach of trust), setting aside the trial court's conviction dated January 22, 2019. The court found the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. Key Findings: The court determined the marriage occurred at a community convention where dowry items were provided by convention organizers, not by the complainant's family. Inconsistencies in witness testimonies, absence of corroborating evidence, and the complainant's own brothers' admissions that they had no knowledge of alleged harassment undermined the prosecution's narrative. The court noted the alleged dowry demand lacked specificity regarding timing, location, and circumstances, and no medical evidence supported claims of physical assault. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 01-Jun-2026

    Disposed

    District and Sessions Judge

  4. 29-May-2026

    Final arguments

    District and Sessions Judge

  5. 27-May-2026

    Final arguments

    District and Sessions Judge

  6. 08-May-2026

    Final arguments

    District and Sessions Judge

  7. 22-Apr-2026

    Final arguments

    District and Sessions Judge

  8. 07-Apr-2026

    Final arguments

    District and Sessions Judge

  9. 13-Mar-2026

    Final arguments

    District and Sessions Judge

  10. 13-Jan-2026

    Final arguments

    District and Sessions Judge

  11. 03-Nov-2025

    Final arguments

    District and Sessions Judge

  12. 01-Sep-2025

    Final arguments

    District and Sessions Judge

  13. 01-Aug-2025

    Final arguments

    District and Sessions Judge

  14. 19-Jul-2025

    Final arguments

    District and Sessions Judge

  15. 13-Jun-2025

    Final arguments

    District and Sessions Judge

  16. 05-Jun-2025

    Final arguments

    District and Sessions Judge

  17. 27-Mar-2025

    Final arguments

    District and Sessions Judge

  18. 24-Jan-2025

    Final arguments

    District and Sessions Judge

  19. 19-Nov-2024

    Final arguments

    District and Sessions Judge

  20. 18-Sep-2024

    Final arguments

    District and Sessions Judge

  21. 30-Jul-2024

    Final arguments

    District and Sessions Judge

  22. 26-Jun-2024

    Final arguments

    District and Sessions Judge

  23. 18-May-2024

    Final arguments

    District and Sessions Judge

  24. 20-Mar-2024

    Final arguments

    District and Sessions Judge

  25. 17-Feb-2024

    Final arguments

    District and Sessions Judge

  26. 09-Jan-2024

    Cognizance / issuance of Process/ Service

    District and Sessions Judge

  27. 11-Oct-2023

    Final arguments

    District and Sessions Judge

  28. 08-Jun-2023

    Final arguments

    District and Sessions Judge

  29. 26-Apr-2023

    Final arguments

    District and Sessions Judge

  30. 10-Mar-2023

    Final arguments

    District and Sessions Judge

  31. 11-Jan-2023

    Final arguments

    District and Sessions Judge

  32. 13-Dec-2022

    Final arguments

    District and Sessions Judge

  33. 16-Sep-2022

    Final arguments

    District and Sessions Judge

  34. 07-Sep-2022

    Cognizance / issuance of Process/ Service

    District and Sessions Judge

  35. 13-Jul-2022

    Cognizance / issuance of Process/ Service

    District and Sessions Judge

  36. 23-Jun-2022

    Cognizance / issuance of Process/ Service

    District and Sessions Judge

  37. 23-Mar-2022

    Cognizance / issuance of Process/ Service

    District and Sessions Judge

  38. 15-Jan-2022

    Cognizance / issuance of Process/ Service

    District and Sessions Judge

  39. 11-Aug-2021

    Cognizance / issuance of Process/ Service

    District and Sessions Judge

  40. 19-Apr-2021

    Cognizance / issuance of Process/ Service

    District and Sessions Judge

  41. 17-Apr-2021

    Cognizance / issuance of Process/ Service

    District and Sessions Judge

  42. 20-Jan-2021

    Cognizance / issuance of Process/ Service

    District Judge

  43. 18-Nov-2020

    Cognizance / issuance of Process/ Service

    District Judge

  44. 30-Jul-2020

    Cognizance / issuance of Process/ Service

    District Judge

  45. 06-Jan-2020

    Cognizance / issuance of Process/ Service

    District Judge

  46. 16-Oct-2019

    Cognizance / issuance of Process/ Service

    District Judge

  47. 02-Feb-2019

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  48. 02-Feb-2019

    Case filed

    Registration No. 22/2019

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: 22/2019 - Rampal v. State of Rajasthan Decision (June 1, 2026): The Session Court acquitted appellant Rampal of charges under IPC Sections 498-A (cruelty to wife) and 406 (criminal breach of trust), setting aside the trial court's conviction dated January 22, 2019. The court found the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. Key Findings: The court determined the marriage occurred at a community convention where dowry items were provided by convention organizers, not by the complainant's family. Inconsistencies in witness testimonies, absence of corroborating evidence, and the complainant's own brothers' admissions that they had no knowledge of alleged harassment undermined the prosecution's narrative. The court noted the alleged dowry demand lacked specificity regarding timing, location, and circumstances, and no medical evidence supported claims of physical assault. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case