State (APP) vs RAMNIWAS URFNAHENU Advocate - SHANTANU KUMAR SHARMA — 579/2023

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 147,148,149,332,353,379. Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 13th March 2026.

Cr. Reg. Case - CR. REGULAR

CNR: RJDH020009992023

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

937/2023

Filing Date

02-12-2010

Registration No

579/2023

Registration Date

02-12-2010

Court

CJM ACJM JM Dholpur District HQ

Judge

5-ACJM

Decision Date

13th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Acquitted

FIR Details

FIR Number

76

Police Station

Mania Police StationDhaulpur

Year

2008

Acts & Sections

INDIAN PENAL CODE Section 147,148,149,332,353,379
Wild Life (Protection) Act Section 29,51

Petitioner(s)

State (APP)

Adv. ACJM APP

Respondent(s)

RAMNIWAS URFNAHENU Advocate - SHANTANU KUMAR SHARMA

Hearing History

Judge: 5-ACJM

13-03-2026

Disposed

11-03-2026

Appearance of accused

09-03-2026

Appearance of accused

27-02-2026

Appearance of accused

13-02-2026

Appearance of accused

Final Orders / Judgements

13-03-2026
Copy of judgement

Court Decision Summary The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court in Dholpur acquitted 15 accused persons of charges under IPC Sections 147, 148, 149, 332, 353, 379, and 120B along with Wildlife Protection Act Sections 29/51, 52. The court found the prosecution failed to prove the allegations against the accused with sufficient evidence. Key inconsistencies in witness testimonies regarding the identification of accused persons, lack of independent witnesses, absence of proper documentation of the alleged Chandal River prohibited zone trespass, and failure to recover any contraband evidence led to the acquittal. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Interim Orders

18-11-2025
Order
13-02-2026
Order
09-03-2026
Order
casestatus.in Summary

Court Decision Summary The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court in Dholpur acquitted 15 accused persons of charges under IPC Sections 147, 148, 149, 332, 353, 379, and 120B along with Wildlife Protection Act Sections 29/51, 52. The court found the prosecution failed to prove the allegations against the accused with sufficient evidence. Key inconsistencies in witness testimonies regarding the identification of accused persons, lack of independent witnesses, absence of proper documentation of the alleged Chandal River prohibited zone trespass, and failure to recover any contraband evidence led to the acquittal. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

CJM ACJM JM Dholpur District HQ All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case