The State of West Bengal vs Kajimaha Rafikujjaman @ Kaji Mahammad Jamal — 1225/2024
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 341,323,504,506. Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 11th March 2026.
Gr Case
CNR: WBBD120021772024
Filing Number
2177/2024
Filing Date
28-02-2023
Registration No
1225/2024
Registration Date
01-07-2024
Court
Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kalna, Burdwan
Judge
6-ACJM
Decision Date
11th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ACQUITTED
FIR Details
FIR Number
104
Police Station
MONTESWAR
Year
2023
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
The State of West Bengal
Adv. P.P
Respondent(s)
Kajimaha Rafikujjaman @ Kaji Mahammad Jamal
Hearing History
Judge: 6-ACJM
Disposed
Argument / Further Argument
Evidence
Evidence
Appearance
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 11-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 20-02-2026 | Argument / Further Argument |
| 09-02-2026 | Evidence |
| 25-03-2025 | Evidence |
| 01-07-2024 | Appearance |
Final Orders / Judgements
The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kalna acquitted the accused Kaji Maha Rafikujjaman of charges under IPC sections 341/323/504/506 (wrongful restraint, voluntarily causing hurt, insulting speech, and criminal intimidation). The court found that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, as the complainant (PW-1) testified that the matter was amicably settled and he had no grievance against the accused, while the corroborating witness (PW-2) supported this account. The court held that suspicion cannot replace proof and acquitted the accused accordingly. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kalna acquitted the accused Kaji Maha Rafikujjaman of charges under IPC sections 341/323/504/506 (wrongful restraint, voluntarily causing hurt, insulting speech, and criminal intimidation). The court found that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, as the complainant (PW-1) testified that the matter was amicably settled and he had no grievance against the accused, while the corroborating witness (PW-2) supported this account. The court held that suspicion cannot replace proof and acquitted the accused accordingly. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts