State of West Bengal vs HARADHAN MONDAL AND 1 OTHER — 6314/2023
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 341,323,506,34. Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 16th March 2026.
Gr Case
CNR: WBNP150079762023
Filing Number
6314/2023
Filing Date
02-08-2025
Registration No
6314/2023
Registration Date
02-08-2025
Court
Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Barrackpore, North 24 Pgs.
Judge
8-ACJM
Decision Date
16th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ACQUITTED
FIR Details
FIR Number
369
Police Station
TITAGARH
Year
2023
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State of West Bengal
Respondent(s)
HARADHAN MONDAL AND 1 OTHER
Hearing History
Judge: 8-ACJM
Disposed
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 16-03-2026 | Disposed |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary: State of West Bengal v. Haradhan Mondal (Case 6314/2023) The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Barrackpore acquitted Haradhan Mondal and Anjana Mondal of charges under IPC sections 341/323/506/34 (wrongful restraint, voluntarily causing hurt, and criminal intimidation). The sole prosecution witness—the de facto complainant—testified that he filed the case against his uncle and aunt but had no allegations against them as their dispute was settled, creating vast inconsistency between the written complaint and trial evidence. The court found the prosecution case lacked substance, contained no incriminating evidence, and failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, warranting acquittal. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: State of West Bengal v. Haradhan Mondal (Case 6314/2023) The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Barrackpore acquitted Haradhan Mondal and Anjana Mondal of charges under IPC sections 341/323/506/34 (wrongful restraint, voluntarily causing hurt, and criminal intimidation). The sole prosecution witness—the de facto complainant—testified that he filed the case against his uncle and aunt but had no allegations against them as their dispute was settled, creating vast inconsistency between the written complaint and trial evidence. The court found the prosecution case lacked substance, contained no incriminating evidence, and failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, warranting 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