Procecution vs Murli Advocate - DURGA SHANKAR GOYAL — 4/2020

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 450,376. Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 12th May 2026.

Session Case

CNR: RJJW070000162020

Case disposed

Filing Number

4/2020

Filing Date

06-01-2020

Registration No

4/2020

Registration Date

06-01-2020

Court

ADJ Aklera Jhalawar District

Judge

11-ADJ

Decision Date

12th May 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Acquitted

FIR Details

FIR Number

146

Police Station

Manohar Thana

Year

2019

Acts & Sections

Indian Penal Code Section 450,376

Petitioner(s)

Procecution

Adv. ADP

Respondent(s)

Murli Advocate - DURGA SHANKAR GOYAL

Hearing History

Judge: 11-ADJ

12-05-2026

Disposed

08-05-2026

Judgment

25-04-2026

Final arguments

16-04-2026

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

15-04-2026

Prosecution Evidence

Final Orders / Judgements

12-05-2026
Judgement

Summary of Case 4/2020 Court Decision: The Additional Session Judge acquitted accused Murli (son of Gangaram) of charges under IPC Sections 456 (house-breaking) and 376 (rape) on May 12, 2026, finding the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. Key Reasoning: The court identified critical investigative gaps including: the First Information Report filed six days after the alleged April 8, 2019 incident without explanation; contradictory witness statements regarding when the victim reported the crime; failure to examine key witnesses present at the crime scene (victim's 6-year-old daughter and 12-year-old sister-in-law); medical examination showing no physical corroboration of rape; and conflicting testimonies about the victim's clothing damage. The court also noted an underlying land dispute between the accused's family and the victim's family, suggesting possible motive for a false complaint. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary of Case 4/2020 Court Decision: The Additional Session Judge acquitted accused Murli (son of Gangaram) of charges under IPC Sections 456 (house-breaking) and 376 (rape) on May 12, 2026, finding the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. Key Reasoning: The court identified critical investigative gaps including: the First Information Report filed six days after the alleged April 8, 2019 incident without explanation; contradictory witness statements regarding when the victim reported the crime; failure to examine key witnesses present at the crime scene (victim's 6-year-old daughter and 12-year-old sister-in-law); medical examination showing no physical corroboration of rape; and conflicting testimonies about the victim's clothing damage. The court also noted an underlying land dispute between the accused's family and the victim's family, suggesting possible motive for a false complaint. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

ADJ Aklera Jhalawar District All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case