U.P State Government vs Pramila — 1321/2025
Case under Dowry Prohibition Act Section 3/4. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED on 19th March 2026.
Sessions Case
CNR: UPAU010054442025
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
5294/2025
Filing Date
07-11-2025
Registration No
1321/2025
Registration Date
07-11-2025
Court
District and Session Judge
Judge
2-Addl. District and Sessions Judge/FTC - I Auraiya
Decision Date
19th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISPOSED
FIR Details
FIR Number
851
Police Station
Dibiyapur
Year
2024
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
U.P State Government
Respondent(s)
Pramila
Hearing History
Judge: 2-Addl. District and Sessions Judge/FTC - I Auraiya
Disposed
Charge
Charge
Charge
Charge
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 19-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 16-03-2026 | Charge | |
| 13-03-2026 | Charge | |
| 10-03-2026 | Charge | |
| 26-02-2026 | Charge |
Final Orders / Judgements
COURT JUDGMENT SUMMARY The court acquitted the accused Nishanth Jain Urfz Nishu and Padamchand Jain in a dowry death case involving the death of the bride (Pransi) in December 2024. The court found that the prosecution failed to establish beyond reasonable doubt that the accused caused the death by harassment over inadequate dowry, as the key witness testimonies did not sufficiently corroborate the allegations and no direct evidence proved the accused's involvement in the death. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
COURT JUDGMENT SUMMARY The court acquitted the accused Nishanth Jain Urfz Nishu and Padamchand Jain in a dowry death case involving the death of the bride (Pransi) in December 2024. The court found that the prosecution failed to establish beyond reasonable doubt that the accused caused the death by harassment over inadequate dowry, as the key witness testimonies did not sufficiently corroborate the allegations and no direct evidence proved the accused's involvement in the death. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts