Bharat Kumar (S) vs Satwari Mogya Advocate - Jitendra Nagar — 1130/2016
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 427. Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 10th March 2026.
Cr. Reg. - Criminal Regular
CNR: RJBR020011982016
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
1336/2016
Filing Date
23-08-2016
Registration No
1130/2016
Registration Date
23-08-2016
Court
CJM ACJM JM Baran HQ
Judge
4-CJM Baran
Decision Date
10th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Acquitted
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Bharat Kumar (S)
Adv. APO
Respondent(s)
Satwari Mogya Advocate - Jitendra Nagar
Hearing History
Judge: 4-CJM Baran
Disposed
Final arguments
Prosecution Evidence
Prosecution Evidence
Prosecution Evidence
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 10-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 09-03-2026 | Final arguments | |
| 20-12-2025 | Prosecution Evidence | |
| 25-11-2025 | Prosecution Evidence | |
| 15-09-2025 | Prosecution Evidence |
Final Orders / Judgements
The Chief Judicial Magistrate of Baran District acquitted three accused (Satwari, Jodharaj, and Vijendra) of charges under IPC Section 427 (mischief causing damage) on March 10, 2026, finding insufficient credible evidence to prove they demolished the complainant's house on April 12, 2016. The court determined critical inconsistencies in witness testimonies and lack of documentary evidence (photographs, demolition records) to establish the accused's guilt beyond reasonable doubt, thereby granting them the benefit of doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The Chief Judicial Magistrate of Baran District acquitted three accused (Satwari, Jodharaj, and Vijendra) of charges under IPC Section 427 (mischief causing damage) on March 10, 2026, finding insufficient credible evidence to prove they demolished the complainant's house on April 12, 2016. The court determined critical inconsistencies in witness testimonies and lack of documentary evidence (photographs, demolition records) to establish the accused's guilt beyond reasonable doubt, thereby granting them the benefit of doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts