State Government APP vs Jay Prakash Advocate - HARI SINGH BHAGELA — 774/2024
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 498A,406. Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 12th March 2026.
Cr. Reg. Case - CR. REGULAR
CNR: RJDH020017782024
Filing Number
1770/2024
Filing Date
06-07-2024
Registration No
774/2024
Registration Date
06-07-2024
Court
CJM ACJM JM Dholpur District HQ
Judge
6-Civil Judge And Judicial Magistrate
Decision Date
12th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Acquitted
FIR Details
FIR Number
98
Police Station
Mahila Police Station,Dhaulpur
Year
2024
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State Government APP (Assistant Public Prosecutor)
Adv. Public Prosecutor
Respondent(s)
Jay Prakash Advocate - HARI SINGH BHAGELA
Hearing History
Judge: 6-Civil Judge And Judicial Magistrate
Disposed
Examination of accused u/s. 313 Cr.P.C.
Prosecution Evidence
Prosecution Evidence
Prosecution Evidence
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 12-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 11-03-2026 | Examination of accused u/s. 313 Cr.P.C. |
| 22-12-2025 | Prosecution Evidence |
| 08-10-2025 | Prosecution Evidence |
| 16-07-2025 | Prosecution Evidence |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The Judicial Magistrate of Dholpur acquitted Jayaprakash alias Amit (age 31) of charges under IPC Sections 498-A (cruelty to wife) and 406 (criminal breach of trust) on March 12, 2026. The court found that while the complainant (wife) alleged dowry harassment and cruel treatment after marriage, the prosecution failed to establish these charges with sufficient evidence; the complainant's testimonies contradicted her police statement, and key family witnesses could not corroborate the allegations of demanding five lakhs rupees or physical/mental abuse. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The Judicial Magistrate of Dholpur acquitted Jayaprakash alias Amit (age 31) of charges under IPC Sections 498-A (cruelty to wife) and 406 (criminal breach of trust) on March 12, 2026. The court found that while the complainant (wife) alleged dowry harassment and cruel treatment after marriage, the prosecution failed to establish these charges with sufficient evidence; the complainant's testimonies contradicted her police statement, and key family witnesses could not corroborate the allegations of demanding five lakhs rupees or physical/mental abuse. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts