State Government vs mahesh rai — 2304742/2004
Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 10th March 2026.
Cri. Case
CNR: UPGK160011582004
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
2304742/2004
Filing Date
06-12-2004
Registration No
2304742/2004
Registration Date
06-12-2004
Court
Railway Court Gorakhpur
Judge
23-Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate (Railway)
Decision Date
10th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ACQUITTED
FIR Details
FIR Number
176/04
Police Station
G.R.P. Gorakhpur
Year
2004
Petitioner(s)
State Government
Adv. APO
Respondent(s)
mahesh rai
Hearing History
Judge: 23-Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate (Railway)
Disposed
Arguments
Arguments
Statement U/S 313
Evidence
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 10-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 24-02-2026 | Arguments | |
| 18-02-2026 | Arguments | |
| 11-02-2026 | Statement U/S 313 | |
| 21-01-2026 | Evidence |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (Railway), Gorakhpur acquitted Mahesh Rai of charges under IPC Sections 171, 419, and 420 (impersonating a public servant, cheating by impersonation, and cheating to dishonestly induce delivery of property) because the prosecution failed to present any oral or documentary evidence despite being given numerous opportunities over 20 years. The court emphasized that the principle of speedy trial is fundamental to Article 21 of the Constitution and cited Supreme Court precedents holding that prolonged delays constitute a violation of due process rights. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (Railway), Gorakhpur acquitted Mahesh Rai of charges under IPC Sections 171, 419, and 420 (impersonating a public servant, cheating by impersonation, and cheating to dishonestly induce delivery of property) because the prosecution failed to present any oral or documentary evidence despite being given numerous opportunities over 20 years. The court emphasized that the principle of speedy trial is fundamental to Article 21 of the Constitution and cited Supreme Court precedents holding that prolonged delays constitute a violation of due process rights. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts