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

Case disposed

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

Indian Penal Code Section 341,323,506,34

Petitioner(s)

State of West Bengal

Respondent(s)

HARADHAN MONDAL AND 1 OTHER

Hearing History

Judge: 8-ACJM

16-03-2026

Disposed

Final Orders / Judgements

16-03-2026
Judgement

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.

casestatus.in Summary

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

More from this court

Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Barrackpore, North 24 Pgs. All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case