state vs Prakash etc Advocate - Mr. Moolchand Meena — 84/2021
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 143,323,504,325,308. Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 23rd April 2026.
Session Case
CNR: RJJW060003222021
Filing Number
279/2021
Filing Date
19-04-2021
Registration No
84/2021
Registration Date
19-04-2021
Court
SC ST Jhalawar District HQ
Judge
77-Special Judge SC/ST Cases
Decision Date
23rd April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Acquitted
FIR Details
FIR Number
13
Police Station
Sarola
Year
2017
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
state
Adv. spp
Respondent(s)
Prakash etc Advocate - Mr. Moolchand Meena
Tejraj urf Tejkaran
Kamal
Danmal urf Hansraj
Narayan
Amarlal
Bhojraj
Hearing History
Judge: 77-Special Judge SC/ST Cases
Disposed
Examination of accused u/s. 313 Cr.P.C.
Service of Non-bailable warrant
Service of Non-bailable warrant
Service of Non-bailable warrant
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 23-04-2026 | Disposed |
| 20-04-2026 | Examination of accused u/s. 313 Cr.P.C. |
| 08-04-2026 | Service of Non-bailable warrant |
| 23-03-2026 | Service of Non-bailable warrant |
| 11-03-2026 | Service of Non-bailable warrant |
Final Orders / Judgements
Court Decision Summary The Special Court (SC/ST) in Jhalawar, Rajasthan acquitted six accused persons of charges under IPC sections 143, 323, 325, 504, and 308 (rioting, voluntarily causing hurt and grievous injury, criminal intimidation, and causing hurt by act endangering life). The court found the prosecution failed to prove the case against the accused beyond reasonable doubt due to significant contradictions in eyewitness testimonies, inability of witnesses to identify the attackers, and inconsistencies regarding the number of persons involved in the alleged assault on the complainant. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Court Decision Summary The Special Court (SC/ST) in Jhalawar, Rajasthan acquitted six accused persons of charges under IPC sections 143, 323, 325, 504, and 308 (rioting, voluntarily causing hurt and grievous injury, criminal intimidation, and causing hurt by act endangering life). The court found the prosecution failed to prove the case against the accused beyond reasonable doubt due to significant contradictions in eyewitness testimonies, inability of witnesses to identify the attackers, and inconsistencies regarding the number of persons involved in the alleged assault on the complainant. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts