STATE vs Vinod Kumar Advocate - Sh. Mandroop Singh — 2392/2023
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 498A,406. Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 24th March 2026.
Cr. Reg. Case - CR. REGULAR
CNR: RJJH020044482023
Filing Number
4418/2023
Filing Date
02-11-2023
Registration No
2392/2023
Registration Date
02-11-2023
Court
CJM ACJM JM Jhunjhunu District HQ
Judge
5-ACJM
Decision Date
24th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Acquitted
FIR Details
FIR Number
79
Police Station
Mahila Police Thana Jhunjhunu
Year
2023
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
STATE
Adv. APO
Respondent(s)
Vinod Kumar Advocate - Sh. Mandroop Singh
Hearing History
Judge: 5-ACJM
Disposed
Examination of accused u/s. 313 Cr.P.C.
Prosecution Evidence
Prosecution Evidence
Service of Summons/bailable warrant
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 24-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 12-03-2026 | Examination of accused u/s. 313 Cr.P.C. |
| 21-02-2026 | Prosecution Evidence |
| 13-02-2026 | Prosecution Evidence |
| 10-11-2025 | Service of Summons/bailable warrant |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: State v. Vinod Kumar (2392/2023) Court Decision: The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jhunjhunu acquitted defendant Vinod Kumar of dowry harassment charges under IPC Section 498A (cruelty by husband/in-laws) on 24.03.2026, finding insufficient evidence. He was previously acquitted under Section 406 (criminal breach of trust) following a settlement between parties. Key Reasoning: All three prosecution witnesses, including the complainant wife Savita herself, contradicted the dowry allegations during examination. The complainant admitted in court that the accused never demanded dowry or harassed her, contradicting her own police complaint. Finding the witnesses hostile/unreliable and lacking substantive evidence beyond doubt, the court granted the accused the benefit of doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: State v. Vinod Kumar (2392/2023) Court Decision: The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jhunjhunu acquitted defendant Vinod Kumar of dowry harassment charges under IPC Section 498A (cruelty by husband/in-laws) on 24.03.2026, finding insufficient evidence. He was previously acquitted under Section 406 (criminal breach of trust) following a settlement between parties. Key Reasoning: All three prosecution witnesses, including the complainant wife Savita herself, contradicted the dowry allegations during examination. The complainant admitted in court that the accused never demanded dowry or harassed her, contradicting her own police complaint. Finding the witnesses hostile/unreliable and lacking substantive evidence beyond doubt, the court granted the accused the benefit of doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts