STATE vs Mukesh Advocate - Raghunandan Singh — 1112/2016
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 354A. Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 11th March 2026.
Criminal Regular
CNR: RJJW110008152016
Filing Number
1883/2016
Filing Date
19-10-2016
Registration No
1112/2016
Registration Date
19-10-2016
Court
JM Khanpur Jhalawar District
Judge
11-CJ and JM
Decision Date
11th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Acquitted
FIR Details
FIR Number
187
Police Station
SAROLA
Year
2016
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
STATE
Adv. APO
Respondent(s)
Mukesh Advocate - Raghunandan Singh
Hearing History
Judge: 11-CJ and JM
Disposed
Final arguments
Final arguments
Examination of accused u/s. 313 Cr.P.C.
Prosecution Evidence
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 11-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 09-03-2026 | Final arguments |
| 09-02-2026 | Final arguments |
| 23-01-2026 | Examination of accused u/s. 313 Cr.P.C. |
| 12-01-2026 | Prosecution Evidence |
Final Orders / Judgements
Court Decision Summary The Jhalawar District Court (March 11, 2026) acquitted Mukesh, accused of outraging a woman's modesty under IPC Section 354(k), finding contradictions in the complainant's testimony. The court noted discrepancies between the FIR (filed 5 months after the alleged incident on March 27, 2016), written statements, and court deposition, including conflicting accounts from her mother. The prosecution failed to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt due to inconsistent witness evidence and lack of corroboration. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Court Decision Summary The Jhalawar District Court (March 11, 2026) acquitted Mukesh, accused of outraging a woman's modesty under IPC Section 354(k), finding contradictions in the complainant's testimony. The court noted discrepancies between the FIR (filed 5 months after the alleged incident on March 27, 2016), written statements, and court deposition, including conflicting accounts from her mother. The prosecution failed to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt due to inconsistent witness evidence and lack of corroboration. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts