Rajasthan Government vs Mohanram etc- — 1898/2014
Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 27th March 2026.
Cro - Criminal Orginal
CNR: RJBK080002122012
Filing Number
1170/2014
Filing Date
06-08-2012
Registration No
1898/2014
Registration Date
06-08-2012
Court
ACJM JM Nokha Taluka HQ criminal
Judge
1-ACJM
Decision Date
27th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Acquitted
FIR Details
FIR Number
362/12
Police Station
Nokha Police Station
Year
2012
Petitioner(s)
Rajasthan Government
Adv. App IInd
Respondent(s)
Mohanram etc-
Hearing History
Judge: 1-ACJM
Disposed
Final arguments
Final arguments
Examination of accused u/s. 313 Cr.P.C.
Examination of accused u/s. 313 Cr.P.C.
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 27-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 18-03-2026 | Final arguments |
| 13-03-2026 | Final arguments |
| 10-03-2026 | Examination of accused u/s. 313 Cr.P.C. |
| 25-02-2026 | Examination of accused u/s. 313 Cr.P.C. |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: Rajasthan Government v. Mohanram & Others (Case 1898/2014) Court Decision: The accused (Mohanram, Omprakash, Madhusudhan, and Harishankar) were acquitted of charges under Section 448 read with Section 34 IPC (criminal trespass and criminal intimidation). Key Reasoning: The prosecution failed to establish beyond reasonable doubt that the accused committed house trespass on the complainant's property in Jirassar village between June 20-July 4, 2012. While the complainant's witnesses provided testimony, critical independent corroboration was absent. The investigation officer's own cross-examination acknowledged the disputed property had belonged to the accused's relative (Depalram) since 1976, creating ambiguity about rightful possession and undermining the trespass charge. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: Rajasthan Government v. Mohanram & Others (Case 1898/2014) Court Decision: The accused (Mohanram, Omprakash, Madhusudhan, and Harishankar) were acquitted of charges under Section 448 read with Section 34 IPC (criminal trespass and criminal intimidation). Key Reasoning: The prosecution failed to establish beyond reasonable doubt that the accused committed house trespass on the complainant's property in Jirassar village between June 20-July 4, 2012. While the complainant's witnesses provided testimony, critical independent corroboration was absent. The investigation officer's own cross-examination acknowledged the disputed property had belonged to the accused's relative (Depalram) since 1976, creating ambiguity about rightful possession and undermining the trespass charge. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts