State Government APP vs Arjun etc. Advocate - MURARI LAL — 1858/2024
Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 115(2),125,126(2),190,191(2),352. Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 23rd April 2026.
Cr. Reg. Case - CR. REGULAR
CNR: RJDH020041352024
e-Filing Number
13-12-2024
Filing Number
4121/2024
Filing Date
13-12-2024
Registration No
1858/2024
Registration Date
13-12-2024
Court
CJM ACJM JM Dholpur District HQ
Judge
4-CJM
Decision Date
23rd April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Acquitted
FIR Details
FIR Number
386
Police Station
Kotwali Police Station,Dhaulpur
Year
2024
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State Government APP (Assistant Public Prosecutor)
Adv. Public Prosecutor
Respondent(s)
Arjun etc. Advocate - MURARI LAL
gaurav urf gabbar
aakas
lokendra sagar
dilip
satish
Hearing History
Judge: 4-CJM
Disposed
Examination of accused u/s. 313 Cr.P.C.
Examination of accused u/s. 313 Cr.P.C.
Examination of accused u/s. 313 Cr.P.C.
Framing of Charge/ Plea
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 23-04-2026 | Disposed |
| 21-04-2026 | Examination of accused u/s. 313 Cr.P.C. |
| 16-04-2026 | Examination of accused u/s. 313 Cr.P.C. |
| 09-04-2026 | Examination of accused u/s. 313 Cr.P.C. |
| 28-03-2026 | Framing of Charge/ Plea |
Final Orders / Judgements
The Chief Judicial Magistrate of Dholpur acquitted five accused (Arjun, Aakash, Girav/Gibber, Satish, and Dilip) of charges under IPC Sections 191(2), 125 read with Section 190 (criminal conspiracy to commit perjury), finding the prosecution failed to prove the allegations beyond reasonable doubt. The court noted that while the accused were earlier convicted under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 352 (related to rioting/violence), the evidence did not establish the conspiracy charges, as the key witnesses were deemed unreliable and hostile to the prosecution's case. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The Chief Judicial Magistrate of Dholpur acquitted five accused (Arjun, Aakash, Girav/Gibber, Satish, and Dilip) of charges under IPC Sections 191(2), 125 read with Section 190 (criminal conspiracy to commit perjury), finding the prosecution failed to prove the allegations beyond reasonable doubt. The court noted that while the accused were earlier convicted under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 352 (related to rioting/violence), the evidence did not establish the conspiracy charges, as the key witnesses were deemed unreliable and hostile to the prosecution's case. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts