The State of West Bengal vs Sofiur Molla @ Sofiul Alam Molla — 1366/2023
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 498A,323,34. Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 11th March 2026.
Gr Case
CNR: WBBD120029012023
Filing Number
2901/2023
Filing Date
12-08-2022
Registration No
1366/2023
Registration Date
10-11-2023
Court
Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kalna, Burdwan
Judge
6-ACJM
Decision Date
11th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ACQUITTED
FIR Details
FIR Number
320
Police Station
MONTESWAR
Year
2022
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
The State of West Bengal
Adv. P.P
Respondent(s)
Sofiur Molla @ Sofiul Alam Molla
Roksi Molla@Molla Mehebub Alam
Abul Hossain Molla
Rexona Bibi@Reksona Khatun
Hearing History
Judge: 6-ACJM
Disposed
Argument / Further Argument
Argument / Further Argument
Evidence
E.R OF W.A
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 11-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 19-02-2026 | Argument / Further Argument |
| 09-02-2026 | Argument / Further Argument |
| 29-04-2025 | Evidence |
| 03-10-2024 | E.R OF W.A |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary: The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kalna acquitted all four accused persons (Rakat Ali, Bapi Sk, Morjina Bibi, and Manik Sk) of charges under IPC sections 447/323/354/34 for allegedly assaulting the complainant Ayesa Bibi in 2014. The court found that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, as both key prosecution witnesses (the complainant and her husband) testified that the matter had been amicably settled and they held no grievance against the accused. The court emphasized that suspicion cannot replace proof and granted the accused benefit of doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
Summary: The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kalna acquitted all four accused persons (Rakat Ali, Bapi Sk, Morjina Bibi, and Manik Sk) of charges under IPC sections 447/323/354/34 for allegedly assaulting the complainant Ayesa Bibi in 2014. The court found that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, as both key prosecution witnesses (the complainant and her husband) testified that the matter had been amicably settled and they held no grievance against the accused. The court emphasized that suspicion cannot replace proof and granted the accused benefit of doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts