State of U.P. vs MADAN — 77/2022
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 323,352. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED on 06th March 2026.
Sessions Case
CNR: UPBG010003172022
e-Filing Number
21-01-2022
Filing Number
287/2022
Filing Date
21-01-2022
Registration No
77/2022
Registration Date
22-01-2022
Court
District and Session Judge
Judge
8-ADJ(Special Judge Sc/St Act)
Decision Date
06th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISPOSED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State of U.P.
Adv. special public prosecutor
Respondent(s)
MADAN
MANISH
NIKHIL
Hearing History
Judge: 8-ADJ(Special Judge Sc/St Act)
Disposed
Statement U/S 313
Statement U/S 313
Statement U/S 313
Statement U/S 313
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 06-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 25-02-2026 | Statement U/S 313 |
| 23-02-2026 | Statement U/S 313 |
| 20-02-2026 | Statement U/S 313 |
| 19-02-2026 | Statement U/S 313 |
Final Orders / Judgements
Court Decision Summary The Additional Sessions Court, Bagpat acquitted three accused (Madan, Manish, and Nikhil) of charges under IPC Sections 323/34 and 352, and SC/ST Act Section 3(1)(d), finding the prosecution failed to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The court noted that the primary witness (PW-1, the complainant) contradicted the prosecution narrative during examination, stating he could not remember the incident details, while the second witness (PW-2) also retracted key allegations during cross-examination, rendering the prosecution case doubtful and necessitating acquittal with benefit of doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Court Decision Summary The Additional Sessions Court, Bagpat acquitted three accused (Madan, Manish, and Nikhil) of charges under IPC Sections 323/34 and 352, and SC/ST Act Section 3(1)(d), finding the prosecution failed to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The court noted that the primary witness (PW-1, the complainant) contradicted the prosecution narrative during examination, stating he could not remember the incident details, while the second witness (PW-2) also retracted key allegations during cross-examination, rendering the prosecution case doubtful and necessitating acquittal with benefit of doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts