Jagdish Sharma vs Rambabu — 7/2019
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 447,427,323. Disposed: Uncontested--Convicted on Plead Guilty / Plea Bargaining on 25th March 2026.
Cr. Reg. Case - CR. REGULAR
CNR: RJPG070000172019
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
17/2019
Filing Date
04-01-2019
Registration No
7/2019
Registration Date
04-01-2019
Court
ACJM TALUKACOURT CHHOTISADARI
Judge
9-Senior Civil Judge and ACJM
Decision Date
25th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--Convicted on Plead Guilty / Plea Bargaining
FIR Details
FIR Number
117
Police Station
CHHOTISADRI
Year
2016
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Jagdish Sharma
Adv. SH. SANJAY KHIMESARA
Respondent(s)
Rambabu
Hearing History
Judge: 9-Senior Civil Judge and ACJM
Disposed
Prosecution Evidence
Service of Non-bailable warrant
Service of Non-bailable warrant
Service of Non-bailable warrant
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 25-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 09-03-2026 | Prosecution Evidence | |
| 27-11-2025 | Service of Non-bailable warrant | |
| 09-09-2025 | Service of Non-bailable warrant | |
| 19-05-2025 | Service of Non-bailable warrant |
Final Orders / Judgements
The court dismissed the petition filed under Section 323 IPC against the accused. The court found that the accused's conduct did not constitute deliberate and wrongful restraint as alleged, and that the evidence presented by the petitioner was insufficient to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt. Consequently, the court declined to grant relief under the Anticipatory Bail provision and directed that the petitioner has no grounds for the relief sought. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The court dismissed the petition filed under Section 323 IPC against the accused. The court found that the accused's conduct did not constitute deliberate and wrongful restraint as alleged, and that the evidence presented by the petitioner was insufficient to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt. Consequently, the court declined to grant relief under the Anticipatory Bail provision and directed that the petitioner has no grounds for the relief sought. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts