State vs raju Advocate - Ramkishan Prajapati — 151/2021
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 279,337,338,. Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 10th March 2026.
Cr. Reg. Case - CR. REGULAR
CNR: RJBD080002572021
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
257/2021
Filing Date
11-02-2021
Registration No
151/2021
Registration Date
11-02-2021
Court
ACJM JM K Patan Taluka
Judge
2-ACJM
Decision Date
10th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Acquitted
FIR Details
FIR Number
544
Police Station
K.Patan
Year
2019
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State
Adv. PROSECUTION OFFICER
Respondent(s)
raju Advocate - Ramkishan Prajapati
mishrilal
Hearing History
Judge: 2-ACJM
Disposed
Final arguments
Prosecution Evidence
Prosecution Evidence
Prosecution Evidence
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 10-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 09-03-2026 | Final arguments | |
| 07-03-2026 | Prosecution Evidence | |
| 27-02-2026 | Prosecution Evidence | |
| 20-02-2026 | Prosecution Evidence |
Final Orders / Judgements
Court Decision Summary The court acquitted accused Raju of charges under IPC Sections 279, 337, 338 (rash/negligent driving causing hurt) and Motor Vehicles Act Sections 185, 3/181. The court found that the prosecution failed to conclusively prove the accused recklessly drove the motorcycle that hit the victim, noting critical evidentiary gaps: the victim could not identify the vehicle number or driver, no independent eyewitness corroborated the accident, and no medical evidence confirmed drunk driving. Due to reasonable doubt, the accused was acquitted. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Court Decision Summary The court acquitted accused Raju of charges under IPC Sections 279, 337, 338 (rash/negligent driving causing hurt) and Motor Vehicles Act Sections 185, 3/181. The court found that the prosecution failed to conclusively prove the accused recklessly drove the motorcycle that hit the victim, noting critical evidentiary gaps: the victim could not identify the vehicle number or driver, no independent eyewitness corroborated the accident, and no medical evidence confirmed drunk driving. Due to reasonable doubt, the accused was acquitted. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts