Rajasthan Goverment (W) vs Mohd. Ashfak @ Bhatta Advocate - Jitendra Nagar — 8/2017
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 457,380. Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 09th April 2026.
Cr. Reg. - Criminal Regular
CNR: RJBR020008912017
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
889/2017
Filing Date
19-11-2016
Registration No
8/2017
Registration Date
19-11-2016
Court
CJM ACJM JM Baran HQ
Judge
4-CJM Baran
Decision Date
09th April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Acquitted
FIR Details
FIR Number
448
Police Station
Sadar Police Station, Baran
Year
2016
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Rajasthan Goverment (W)
Adv. APO
Respondent(s)
Mohd. Ashfak @ Bhatta Advocate - Jitendra Nagar
Hearing History
Judge: 4-CJM Baran
Disposed
Final arguments
Final arguments
Final arguments
Final arguments
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 09-04-2026 | Disposed | |
| 06-04-2026 | Final arguments | |
| 23-03-2026 | Final arguments | |
| 16-03-2026 | Final arguments | |
| 10-03-2026 | Final arguments |
Final Orders / Judgements
Court Decision Summary Case: State v. Mohammad Asfaq Urf Bhatta (Criminal Case No. 49/2026, Bara District Court, Rajasthan) Decision: The accused Mohammad Asfaq Urf Bhatta was acquitted of charges under IPC Sections 457 (house-breaking) and 380 (theft) on April 9, 2026. The court found the prosecution evidence contradictory and insufficient—witnesses provided conflicting accounts about whether the house lock was broken, the seized items were not physically presented during trial, and critical procedural gaps existed regarding property ownership documentation and independent verification of the crime scene. The court granted the accused the benefit of doubt and ordered his release on personal bail. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Court Decision Summary Case: State v. Mohammad Asfaq Urf Bhatta (Criminal Case No. 49/2026, Bara District Court, Rajasthan) Decision: The accused Mohammad Asfaq Urf Bhatta was acquitted of charges under IPC Sections 457 (house-breaking) and 380 (theft) on April 9, 2026. The court found the prosecution evidence contradictory and insufficient—witnesses provided conflicting accounts about whether the house lock was broken, the seized items were not physically presented during trial, and critical procedural gaps existed regarding property ownership documentation and independent verification of the crime scene. The court granted the accused the benefit of doubt and ordered his release on personal bail. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts