State of Rajasthan vs Jagdish Meena — 86/2025

Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 351(3),64(1). Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 12th March 2026.

Session Case

CNR: RJPG010008102025

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

686/2025

Filing Date

17-09-2025

Registration No

86/2025

Registration Date

26-09-2025

Court

DJ ADJ COURT PRATAPGARH DISTRICT HQ

Judge

1-District Judge

Decision Date

12th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Acquitted

FIR Details

FIR Number

0095

Police Station

Devgarh

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 351(3),64(1)

Petitioner(s)

State of Rajasthan

Adv. Public Prosecutor

Respondent(s)

Jagdish Meena

Hearing History

Judge: 1-District Judge

12-03-2026

Disposed

10-03-2026

Prosecution Evidence

09-03-2026

Prosecution Evidence

20-02-2026

Prosecution Evidence

23-01-2026

Prosecution Evidence

Final Orders / Judgements

12-03-2026
Decree

Case Summary The Session Court in Pratapgarh, Rajasthan acquitted accused Jagdish on March 12, 2026 of rape charges under Section 64(1) of the Indian Penal Code due to insufficient evidence. While the prosecution presented testimonies from the victim and investigating officer, the victim herself contradicted the rape allegations during cross-examination, stating no such incident occurred and that the complaint was filed due to a monetary dispute over Rs. 1.5 lakh. Additionally, the critical FSL (Forensic Science Laboratory) report, though samples were sent, was never produced as evidence to corroborate the rape claim, creating reasonable doubt about the prosecution's case. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary The Session Court in Pratapgarh, Rajasthan acquitted accused Jagdish on March 12, 2026 of rape charges under Section 64(1) of the Indian Penal Code due to insufficient evidence. While the prosecution presented testimonies from the victim and investigating officer, the victim herself contradicted the rape allegations during cross-examination, stating no such incident occurred and that the complaint was filed due to a monetary dispute over Rs. 1.5 lakh. Additionally, the critical FSL (Forensic Science Laboratory) report, though samples were sent, was never produced as evidence to corroborate the rape claim, creating reasonable doubt about the prosecution's case. 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

DJ ADJ COURT PRATAPGARH DISTRICT HQ All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case