Rajasthan Goverment vs rambilash Advocate - Kamlesh Dubey — 319/2016
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 341,323,324,326. Disposed: Contested--Convicted and Released on Probation on 30th March 2026.
Cr. Reg. Case - CR. REGULAR
CNR: RJBR020017682016
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
319/2016
Filing Date
30-07-2016
Registration No
319/2016
Registration Date
30-07-2016
Court
CJM ACJM JM Baran HQ
Judge
4-CJM Baran
Decision Date
30th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Convicted and Released on Probation
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Rajasthan Goverment
Adv. apo
Respondent(s)
rambilash Advocate - Kamlesh Dubey
Hearing History
Judge: 4-CJM Baran
Disposed
Final arguments
Final arguments
Final arguments
Final arguments
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 30-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 27-03-2026 | Final arguments | |
| 24-03-2026 | Final arguments | |
| 17-03-2026 | Final arguments | |
| 11-03-2026 | Final arguments |
Final Orders / Judgements
Court Decision Summary The Chief Judicial Magistrate of Baran district acquitted the accused Rambilash under IPC Sections 324 and 326 (causing grievous injury with dangerous weapons) due to insufficient evidence, but convicted him under Sections 323 and 341 (voluntarily causing hurt and wrongful restraint). The court found contradictions in witness testimonies regarding the weapon used (pipe vs. hammer), inconsistencies in injury documentation, and failure to establish that injuries were caused by a lethal weapon, thereby giving the accused the benefit of doubt on the more serious charges. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Court Decision Summary The Chief Judicial Magistrate of Baran district acquitted the accused Rambilash under IPC Sections 324 and 326 (causing grievous injury with dangerous weapons) due to insufficient evidence, but convicted him under Sections 323 and 341 (voluntarily causing hurt and wrongful restraint). The court found contradictions in witness testimonies regarding the weapon used (pipe vs. hammer), inconsistencies in injury documentation, and failure to establish that injuries were caused by a lethal weapon, thereby giving the accused the benefit of doubt on the more serious charges. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts