State of West Bengal vs GOPAL MONDAL AND 1 OUTHER — 6313/2020

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 341,323,506,34. Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 16th March 2026.

Case disposed

Gr Case

CNR: WBNP150040482020

Filing Number

6313/2020

Filing Date

19-Jan-2026

Registration No

6313/2020

Registration Date

19-Jan-2026

Court

Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Barrackpore, North 24 Pgs.

Judge

8-Acjm

Decision Date

16-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ACQUITTED

Last updated 11-Jun-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

370

Police Station

TITAGARH

Year

2023

Acts & Sections

Indian Penal Code Section 341,323,506,34

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.State of West Bengal

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.GOPAL MONDAL AND 1 OUTHER

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 16-Mar-2026

    JudgementView PDF

    The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Barrackpore acquitted Gopal Mondal and Sampa Mondal of charges under IPC sections 341/323/506/34 (wrongful restraint, voluntarily causing hurt, and criminal intimidation). The sole prosecution witness, the defacto complainant Smt. Anjana Mondal, retracted her allegations stating she had no case against the accused and the dispute was settled. The court found vast discrepancies between the written complaint and trial testimony, lack of incriminating evidence, and the prosecution's failure to establish essential ingredients of the offences, rendering the case fundamentally weak. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 16-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Acjm

  4. 19-Jan-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 6313/2020

casestatus.in Summary

The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Barrackpore acquitted Gopal Mondal and Sampa Mondal of charges under IPC sections 341/323/506/34 (wrongful restraint, voluntarily causing hurt, and criminal intimidation). The sole prosecution witness, the defacto complainant Smt. Anjana Mondal, retracted her allegations stating she had no case against the accused and the dispute was settled. The court found vast discrepancies between the written complaint and trial testimony, lack of incriminating evidence, and the prosecution's failure to establish essential ingredients of the offences, rendering the case fundamentally weak. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case