State Of West Bengal vs MITHU HOSSAIN — 384/2019

Case under 7.Indian Penal Code Section 376,511,323. Disposed: Contested--ACQUITED on 07th April 2026.

Case disposed

Sessions Case

CNR: WBJP050001642019

Filing Number

68/2019

Filing Date

04-Feb-2019

Registration No

384/2019

Registration Date

04-Feb-2019

Court

District and Sessions Judge, Alipurduar

Judge

2-ADJ Ftc I

Decision Date

07-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ACQUITED

Last updated 01-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

172

Police Station

JAYGAON

Year

2017

Acts & Sections

7.Indian Penal Code Section 376,511,323

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.State Of West Bengal

    Adv. HUENGSANG TITUNG

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.MITHU HOSSAIN

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 07-Apr-2026

    Final OrderView PDF

  3. 07-Apr-2026

    Copy ofJudgmentView PDF

    Case Summary The Additional District & Sessions Judge, Alipurduar acquitted accused Mithu Hossain of rape charges under IPC Section 376/511/323, finding the prosecution's evidence insufficient and riddled with discrepancies. The court noted that the principal witness (victim/FIR lodger) contradicted the FIR by admitting she didn't remember its contents, filed the complaint out of fear due to a property dispute rather than sexual assault, and provided no evidence of sexual assault—only that she was slapped. The judgment emphasized that while victim testimony in rape cases is given significant weight, it must still inspire confidence and withstand scrutiny; here, the gaps and contradictions rendered the prosecution story highly improbable. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  4. 07-Apr-2026

    Disposed

    ADJ Ftc I

  5. 10-Mar-2026

    Copy of OrderView PDF

  6. 10-Mar-2026

    Evidence

    ADJ Ftc I

  7. 05-Feb-2026

    Copy of OrderView PDF

  8. 05-Feb-2026

    Evidence

    ADJ Ftc I

  9. 16-Dec-2025

    Copy of OrderView PDF

  10. 16-Dec-2025

    Evidence

    ADJ Ftc I

  11. 18-Sep-2025

    Copy of OrderView PDF

  12. 18-Sep-2025

    Evidence

    ADJ Ftc I

  13. 16-Jul-2025

    Copy of OrderView PDF

  14. 16-Jul-2025

    Evidence

    ADJ Ftc I

  15. 20-May-2025

    Copy of OrderView PDF

  16. 20-May-2025

    Evidence

    ADJ Ftc I

  17. 20-Feb-2025

    Copy of OrderView PDF

  18. 20-Feb-2025

    Evidence

    ADJ Ftc I

  19. 19-Feb-2025

    Copy of OrderView PDF

  20. 19-Feb-2025

    Evidence

    ADJ Ftc I

  21. 13-Sep-2024

    Evidence

    ADJ Ftc I

  22. 28-Feb-2024

    Evidence

    ADJ Ftc I

  23. 16-Aug-2023

    Copy of OrderView PDF

  24. 16-Aug-2023

    Evidence

    ADJ Ftc I

  25. 16-Jan-2023

    Evidence

    ADJ Ftc I

  26. 23-Sep-2022

    Evidence

    ADJ Ftc I

  27. 20-Apr-2022

    Copy of OrderView PDF

  28. 20-Apr-2022

    Charge / Plea Hearing

    Addl District and Sessions Judge Ftc I

  29. 09-Nov-2021

    Charge / Plea Hearing

    Addl District and Sessions Judge Ftc I

  30. 27-May-2021

    Appearance

    ADJ Ftc I

  31. 06-May-2021

    Appearance

    ADJ Ftc I

  32. 06-Mar-2021

    Appearance

    Addl District and Sessions Judge

  33. 18-Jan-2021

    Appearance

    Addl District and Sessions Judge

  34. 27-Nov-2020

    Appearance

    Addl District and Sessions Judge

  35. 28-Sep-2020

    E.R Of.w/A

    Addl District and Sessions Judge

  36. 06-Jun-2020

    E.R Of.w/A

    Addl District and Sessions Judge

  37. 12-Mar-2020

    E.R Of.w/A

    Addl District and Sessions Judge

  38. 19-Dec-2019

    E.R Of.w/A

    Addl District and Sessions Judge

  39. 05-Sep-2019

    Appearance

    Addl District and Sessions Judge

  40. 22-Jul-2019

    Appearance

    Addl District and Sessions Judge

  41. 07-May-2019

    Appearance

    ADJ

  42. 29-Mar-2019

    Appearance

    ADJ

  43. 14-Feb-2019

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  44. 04-Feb-2019

    Case filed

    Registration No. 384/2019

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary The Additional District & Sessions Judge, Alipurduar acquitted accused Mithu Hossain of rape charges under IPC Section 376/511/323, finding the prosecution's evidence insufficient and riddled with discrepancies. The court noted that the principal witness (victim/FIR lodger) contradicted the FIR by admitting she didn't remember its contents, filed the complaint out of fear due to a property dispute rather than sexual assault, and provided no evidence of sexual assault—only that she was slapped. The judgment emphasized that while victim testimony in rape cases is given significant weight, it must still inspire confidence and withstand scrutiny; here, the gaps and contradictions rendered the prosecution story highly improbable. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case