State Goverment vs CHATUR BHUJ MEENA Advocate - APP — 278/2015
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 341-447-323-325/34. Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 09th March 2026.
REG. CRI. CASE
CNR: RJPG070003262015
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
330/2015
Filing Date
23-09-2015
Registration No
278/2015
Registration Date
23-09-2015
Court
ACJM TALUKACOURT CHHOTISADARI
Judge
9-Senior Civil Judge and ACJM
Decision Date
09th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Acquitted
FIR Details
FIR Number
186
Police Station
CHHOTISADRI
Year
2011
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State Goverment
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
CHATUR BHUJ MEENA Advocate - APP (Assistant Public Prosecutor)
Hearing History
Judge: 9-Senior Civil Judge and ACJM
Disposed
Examination of accused u/s. 313 Cr.P.C.
Examination of accused u/s. 313 Cr.P.C.
Appearance of accused
Appearance of accused
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 09-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 27-02-2026 | Examination of accused u/s. 313 Cr.P.C. | |
| 24-02-2026 | Examination of accused u/s. 313 Cr.P.C. | |
| 17-02-2026 | Appearance of accused | |
| 09-02-2026 | Appearance of accused |
Final Orders / Judgements
Court Decision Summary The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chotisadi, Pratapgarh (Rajasthan) acquitted accused Mangu @ Mangilal of charges under IPC Sections 341, 447, 323, and 325/34 due to insufficient evidence beyond reasonable doubt. The court found contradictions and inconsistencies in prosecution witnesses' testimonies regarding the alleged assault incident dated September 7, 2011, and noted that eyewitnesses failed to corroborate the prosecution's narrative, thereby granting the benefit of doubt to the accused. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Court Decision Summary The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chotisadi, Pratapgarh (Rajasthan) acquitted accused Mangu @ Mangilal of charges under IPC Sections 341, 447, 323, and 325/34 due to insufficient evidence beyond reasonable doubt. The court found contradictions and inconsistencies in prosecution witnesses' testimonies regarding the alleged assault incident dated September 7, 2011, and noted that eyewitnesses failed to corroborate the prosecution's narrative, thereby granting the benefit of doubt to the accused. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts