STATE vs SURESH KUMAR URF CHAKUDA — 1404/2020

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 380. Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 08th April 2026.

Case disposed

Cr. Reg. Case - CR. REGULAR

CNR: RJDS020006742016

Filing Number

3221/2016

Filing Date

25-Apr-2016

Registration No

1404/2020

Registration Date

25-Apr-2016

Court

CJM ACJM JM Dausa District HQ

Judge

4-CJM

Decision Date

08-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Acquitted

Last updated 12-Apr-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

14

Police Station

SADAR, DAUSA

Year

2016

Acts & Sections

Indian Penal Code Section 380

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.STATE

    Adv. PO

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.SURESH KUMAR URF CHAKUDA

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 08-Apr-2026

    JudgementView PDF

  3. 08-Apr-2026

    Disposed

    CJM

  4. 24-Mar-2026

    Examination of accused u/s. 313 Cr.P.C.

    CJM

  5. 07-Mar-2026

    Prosecution Evidence

    CJM

  6. 23-Feb-2026

    Prosecution Evidence

    CJM

  7. 11-Feb-2026

    OrderView PDF

  8. 11-Feb-2026

    Prosecution Evidence

    CJM

  9. 27-Jan-2026

    OrderView PDF

  10. 27-Jan-2026

    Prosecution Evidence

    CJM

  11. 16-Jan-2026

    Prosecution Evidence

    CJM

  12. 27-Nov-2025

    Prosecution Evidence

    Acjm No. 2

  13. 07-Oct-2025

    Prosecution Evidence

    Acjm No. 2

  14. 25-Jul-2025

    Prosecution Evidence

    Acjm No. 2

  15. 15-May-2025

    Prosecution Evidence

    Acjm No. 2

  16. 07-May-2025

    Framing of Charge/ Plea

    Acjm No. 2

  17. 28-Feb-2025

    Service of Non-bailable warrant

    Acjm No. 2

  18. 16-Jan-2025

    Service of Non-bailable warrant

    Acjm No. 2

  19. 06-Nov-2024

    Service of Non-bailable warrant

    Acjm No. 2

  20. 29-Aug-2024

    Service of Non-bailable warrant

    Acjm No. 2

  21. 07-Jun-2024

    Service of Non-bailable warrant

    Acjm No. 2

  22. 03-Apr-2024

    Service of Non-bailable warrant

    Acjm No. 2

  23. 17-Feb-2024

    Service of Non-bailable warrant

    Acjm No. 2

  24. 19-Dec-2023

    Service of Non-bailable warrant

    Acjm No. 2

  25. 04-Oct-2023

    Service of Non-bailable warrant

    Acjm No. 2

  26. 18-Aug-2023

    Service of Non-bailable warrant

    Acjm No. 2

  27. 13-Jun-2023

    Service of Non-bailable warrant

    Acjm No. 2

  28. 11-May-2023

    Service of Non-bailable warrant

    Acjm No. 2

  29. 10-Jan-2023

    Service of Non-bailable warrant

    CJM

  30. 14-Sep-2022

    Service of Non-bailable warrant

    CJM

  31. 15-Jul-2022

    Service of Non-bailable warrant

    CJM

  32. 06-May-2022

    Service of Non-bailable warrant

    CJM

  33. 20-Jan-2022

    Service of Non-bailable warrant

    CJM

  34. 15-Sep-2021

    Service of Non-bailable warrant

    CJM

  35. 16-Jun-2021

    Service of Non-bailable warrant

    CJM

  36. 18-Mar-2021

    Service of Non-bailable warrant

    CJM

  37. 19-Oct-2020

    Service of Non-bailable warrant

    CJM

  38. 24-Jun-2020

    Service of Non-bailable warrant

    CJM

  39. 29-May-2020

    Service of Non-bailable warrant

    CJM

  40. 15-Apr-2020

    Service of Non-bailable warrant

    CJM

  41. 19-Mar-2020

    Service of Non-bailable warrant

    CJM

  42. 05-Dec-2019

    Service of Non-bailable warrant

    CJM

  43. 09-Aug-2019

    Service of Non-bailable warrant

    CJM

  44. 30-Apr-2019

    Service of Non-bailable warrant

    CJM

  45. 14-Sep-2018

    Service of Non-bailable warrant

    CJM

  46. 25-Apr-2018

    Service of Non-bailable warrant

    CJM

  47. 29-Nov-2017

    Service of Non-bailable warrant

    CJM

  48. 05-Jul-2017

    Awaiting Warrant

    CJM

  49. 04-Mar-2017

    Awaiting Warrant

    CJM

  50. 24-Aug-2016

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  51. 25-Apr-2016

    Case filed

    Registration No. 1404/2020

casestatus.in Summary

Court Judgment Summary The Chief Judicial Magistrate of Dausa acquitted the accused, Suresh Kumar alias Chakuda, of theft charges under IPC Section 380. The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt due to significant gaps in evidence, including lack of independent witnesses to the crime, no recovery of the broken lock from the crime scene, and contradictory statements among witnesses. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case