State of West Bengal vs Padip Bouri — 435/2023

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 379,411,414,120B. Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 11th March 2026.

Gr Case

CNR: WBPU060006342023

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

634/2023

Filing Date

01-07-2023

Registration No

435/2023

Registration Date

01-07-2023

Court

Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Raghunathpur, Purulia

Judge

5-ACJM II

Decision Date

11th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ACQUITTED

Acts & Sections

Indian Penal Code Section 379,411,414,120B

Petitioner(s)

State of West Bengal

Adv. Parimol Choudhury

Respondent(s)

Padip Bouri

Hearing History

Judge: 5-ACJM II

11-03-2026

Disposed

10-03-2026

Examination under section 313 Cr.P.C

03-01-2026

Evidence

11-11-2025

Evidence

19-09-2025

Evidence

Final Orders / Judgements

11-03-2026
Daliy Order
11-03-2026
Judgement

Court Decision Summary The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate acquitted both accused (Pradip Bauri and Bhupesh Dhayra) of charges under IPC sections 379/411/414/120B and WB Mines and Minerals Act, finding the prosecution's case riddled with loopholes. The court found that eyewitnesses could not identify the tractor number or accused persons, no independent seizure witnesses were present, and the complainant failed to collect sand samples for chemical examination, creating reasonable doubt about theft charges. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Interim Orders

08-08-2023
Daliy Order
05-10-2023
Daliy Order
26-12-2023
Daliy Order
12-03-2024
Daliy Order
04-06-2024
Daliy Order
08-08-2024
Daliy Order
11-11-2024
Daliy Order
14-01-2025
Daliy Order
08-04-2025
Daliy Order
11-11-2025
Daliy Order
10-03-2026
Daliy Order
casestatus.in Summary

Court Decision Summary The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate acquitted both accused (Pradip Bauri and Bhupesh Dhayra) of charges under IPC sections 379/411/414/120B and WB Mines and Minerals Act, finding the prosecution's case riddled with loopholes. The court found that eyewitnesses could not identify the tractor number or accused persons, no independent seizure witnesses were present, and the complainant failed to collect sand samples for chemical examination, creating reasonable doubt about theft charges. 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, Raghunathpur, Purulia All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case