Govt. of West Bengal vs Shuvo Ghosh Advocate - Jaydeep Palit — 2761/2025

Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 85,316(2),3(5). Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 24th March 2026.

Case disposed

Gr Case

CNR: WBNP070075792025

Filing Number

7579/2025

Filing Date

18-Dec-2025

Registration No

2761/2025

Registration Date

18-Dec-2025

Court

Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bongaon, North 24 Parganas

Judge

5-Acjm

Decision Date

24-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ACQUITTED

Last updated 03-Jul-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

176

Police Station

BONGAON

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 85,316(2),3(5)

Dowry Prohibition Act Section 3,4

Petitioner(s)

1.Govt. of West Bengal

Adv. p p

Respondent(s)

1.Shuvo Ghosh Advocate - Jaydeep Palit
2.Kamal Kanti Ghosh

Adv. Jaydeep Palit

Case History

Case disposedDisposed
24-Mar-2026

JudgementView PDF

Case Summary: 2761/2025 The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate acquitted accused Kamal Kanti Ghosh of charges under sections 85/316(2)/3(5) of BNS (cruelty and dowry-related offenses). The informant-wife, sole prosecution witness, testified that she filed the case out of misunderstanding and had no allegations against the accused, stating she would not object to his acquittal. Finding no incriminating evidence, the court concluded the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt and discharged the accused. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
24-Mar-2026

Disposed

Acjm
03-Jan-2026

First hearing

Initial hearing scheduled
18-Dec-2025

Case filed

Registration No. 2761/2025

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: 2761/2025 The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate acquitted accused Kamal Kanti Ghosh of charges under sections 85/316(2)/3(5) of BNS (cruelty and dowry-related offenses). The informant-wife, sole prosecution witness, testified that she filed the case out of misunderstanding and had no allegations against the accused, stating she would not object to his acquittal. Finding no incriminating evidence, the court concluded the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt and discharged the accused. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.