State vs BALRAM ETC Advocate - PKS — 189/2019
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 392,34,. Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 23rd March 2026.
Cr. Reg. Case - CR. REGULAR
CNR: RJBR090006422019
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
642/2019
Filing Date
12-07-2019
Registration No
189/2019
Registration Date
12-07-2019
Court
ACJM Shahbad Taluka
Judge
1-ACJM
Decision Date
23rd March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Acquitted
FIR Details
FIR Number
95
Police Station
Kelwara Police Station
Year
2019
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State
Adv. app
Respondent(s)
BALRAM ETC Advocate - PKS
NAINA @ GATHIYA @ MEMBER
RAY SINGH
Hearing History
Judge: 1-ACJM
Disposed
Prosecution Evidence
Prosecution Evidence
Prosecution Evidence
Prosecution Evidence
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 23-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 17-03-2026 | Prosecution Evidence | |
| 10-03-2026 | Prosecution Evidence | |
| 26-02-2026 | Prosecution Evidence | |
| 24-02-2026 | Prosecution Evidence |
Final Orders / Judgements
Court Decision Summary The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shahabad acquitted all four accused (Rajsingh, Balram, Nena Urf Guddu, and Bahadur Singh) on March 23, 2026, in a robbery case (IPC 392/34). The court found insufficient evidence to prove the accused committed the April 22, 2019 dacoity where ₹41,000 and ₹60,000 were allegedly looted from two victims. Key weaknesses included: no proper identification parade of accused, contradictory witness testimonies, lack of witness corroboration of identifications, and procedural deficiencies in the investigation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Court Decision Summary The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shahabad acquitted all four accused (Rajsingh, Balram, Nena Urf Guddu, and Bahadur Singh) on March 23, 2026, in a robbery case (IPC 392/34). The court found insufficient evidence to prove the accused committed the April 22, 2019 dacoity where ₹41,000 and ₹60,000 were allegedly looted from two victims. Key weaknesses included: no proper identification parade of accused, contradictory witness testimonies, lack of witness corroboration of identifications, and procedural deficiencies in the investigation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts