STATE vs RAMCHANDRA ETC Advocate - NARENDRA SINGH SHEKHAWAT — 24/2023
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 457,380. Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 11th May 2026.
Cr. Reg. Case - CR. REGULAR
CNR: RJBK100000612023
Filing Number
60/2023
Filing Date
19-01-2023
Registration No
24/2023
Registration Date
19-01-2023
Court
JM Kolayat Court
Judge
1-JM
Decision Date
11th May 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Acquitted
FIR Details
FIR Number
141
Police Station
Bajju Police Station
Year
2020
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
STATE
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
RAMCHANDRA ETC Advocate - NARENDRA SINGH SHEKHAWAT
PAWAN KUMAR
Hearing History
Judge: 1-JM
Disposed
Prosecution Evidence
Prosecution Evidence
Final arguments
Final arguments
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 11-05-2026 | Disposed |
| 01-05-2026 | Prosecution Evidence |
| 27-04-2026 | Prosecution Evidence |
| 17-04-2026 | Final arguments |
| 08-04-2026 | Final arguments |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: State v. Ramchandra & Pawan Kumar (24/2023) The Judicial Magistrate acquitted both accused, Ramchandra (32) and Pawan Kumar (28), of burglary and theft charges under IPC Sections 457 and 380, finding insufficient evidence to prove the offences beyond reasonable doubt. Although the prosecution presented ten witnesses and circumstantial evidence linking the accused to a nighttime break-in on August 18, 2020, at two residences where jewelry and cash worth ₹15,000 were stolen, the court determined that no direct evidence established the accused committed the crime—neither were they caught in the act, recovered with stolen goods, nor did forensic evidence definitively link them to the burglary. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: State v. Ramchandra & Pawan Kumar (24/2023) The Judicial Magistrate acquitted both accused, Ramchandra (32) and Pawan Kumar (28), of burglary and theft charges under IPC Sections 457 and 380, finding insufficient evidence to prove the offences beyond reasonable doubt. Although the prosecution presented ten witnesses and circumstantial evidence linking the accused to a nighttime break-in on August 18, 2020, at two residences where jewelry and cash worth ₹15,000 were stolen, the court determined that no direct evidence established the accused committed the crime—neither were they caught in the act, recovered with stolen goods, nor did forensic evidence definitively link them to the burglary. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts