State of West Bengal vs MD Alam — 213/2025
Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 318. Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 19th March 2026.
Gr Case
CNR: WBDJ020022322025
Filing Number
2231/2025
Filing Date
09-10-2025
Registration No
213/2025
Registration Date
10-10-2025
Court
Chief Judicial Magistrate, Darjeeling
Judge
5-CJM
Decision Date
19th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ACQUITTED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State of West Bengal
Adv. Pankaj Prasad
Respondent(s)
MD Alam
Hearing History
Judge: 5-CJM
Disposed
Examination under section 313 Cr.P.C
Evidence
Evidence
Appearance
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 19-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 13-03-2026 | Examination under section 313 Cr.P.C |
| 12-12-2025 | Evidence |
| 05-12-2025 | Evidence |
| 31-10-2025 | Appearance |
Final Orders / Judgements
CASE SUMMARY: State of West Bengal v. MD Alam (Case 213/2025) The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Darjeeling acquitted MD Alam of charges under Section 318(2) BNS (cheating) on 19 March 2026. The prosecution alleged that on 6 February 2025, Alam deceitfully took the complainant's mobile phone and initiated a fraudulent NEFT transaction of Rs. 5 lakh from the complainant's bank account. However, the court found the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt because the sole prosecution witness (the complainant) retracted his allegations, admitted the dispute was settled out of court, and explicitly stated he had no objection to the accused's acquittal. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
CASE SUMMARY: State of West Bengal v. MD Alam (Case 213/2025) The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Darjeeling acquitted MD Alam of charges under Section 318(2) BNS (cheating) on 19 March 2026. The prosecution alleged that on 6 February 2025, Alam deceitfully took the complainant's mobile phone and initiated a fraudulent NEFT transaction of Rs. 5 lakh from the complainant's bank account. However, the court found the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt because the sole prosecution witness (the complainant) retracted his allegations, admitted the dispute was settled out of court, and explicitly stated he had no objection to the accused's acquittal. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts