STATE OF RAJASTHAN vs SUNIL KHATANA Advocate - TRILOK SINGH MAHALA — 84/2025
Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 309(4). Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 27th April 2026.
Cr. Reg. Case - CR. REGULAR
CNR: RJSK100002312025
e-Filing Number
19-04-2025
Filing Number
231/2025
Filing Date
19-04-2025
Registration No
84/2025
Registration Date
19-04-2025
Court
ACJM FATEHPUR TALUKA HQ
Judge
1-ACJM
Decision Date
27th April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Acquitted
FIR Details
FIR Number
8
Police Station
Kotwali Fathepur
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
STATE OF RAJASTHAN
Adv. Prosicution Officer
Respondent(s)
SUNIL KHATANA Advocate - TRILOK SINGH MAHALA
LOKESH UR LUCKY
Adv. TRILOK SINGH MAHALA
Anil urf sunil
Hearing History
Judge: 1-ACJM
Disposed
Final arguments
Final arguments
Final arguments
Service of Non-bailable warrant
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 27-04-2026 | Disposed | |
| 17-04-2026 | Final arguments | |
| 07-04-2026 | Final arguments | |
| 24-03-2026 | Final arguments | |
| 10-03-2026 | Service of Non-bailable warrant |
Final Orders / Judgements
Court Decision Summary The Chief Judicial Magistrate of Sikar, Rajasthan acquitted two accused persons (Lokesh alias Laki and Anil Kumar alias Sunil Kumar) of robbery charges under BNS 2023 Sections 309(4) and 3(5) on April 27, 2026. The court found that prosecution evidence contained serious contradictions and failed to prove the allegations beyond reasonable doubt—specifically, no recovery of looted money was made, no weapon was recovered despite claims of cutting a locker, and CCTV evidence cited by witnesses was not produced. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Court Decision Summary The Chief Judicial Magistrate of Sikar, Rajasthan acquitted two accused persons (Lokesh alias Laki and Anil Kumar alias Sunil Kumar) of robbery charges under BNS 2023 Sections 309(4) and 3(5) on April 27, 2026. The court found that prosecution evidence contained serious contradictions and failed to prove the allegations beyond reasonable doubt—specifically, no recovery of looted money was made, no weapon was recovered despite claims of cutting a locker, and CCTV evidence cited by witnesses was not produced. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts