State of West Bengal vs DIPAK MONDAL — 847/2025

Case under Bengal Excise Act Section 46A(c). Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 09th March 2026.

Case disposed

Gr Case

CNR: WBPU060012482025

Filing Number

1243/2025

Filing Date

03-Nov-2025

Registration No

847/2025

Registration Date

03-Nov-2025

Court

Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Raghunathpur, Purulia

Judge

4-Jm I

Decision Date

09-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ACQUITTED

Last updated 22-Apr-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

34

Police Station

NETURIA

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

Bengal Excise Act Section 46A(c)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.State of West Bengal

    Adv. APP In charge

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.DIPAK MONDAL

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 09-Mar-2026

    Daliy OrderView PDF

  3. 09-Mar-2026

    JudgementView PDF

    Summary The Judicial Magistrate Court in Raghunathpur, Purulia acquitted Dipak Mandal of charges under Section 46A(c) of the Bengal Excise Act for illegal possession and sale of liquor. The court found that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt due to critical evidentiary gaps: all prosecution witnesses (police personnel) admitted inability to identify seized articles, no independent local witnesses were examined, and crucially, the chemical examination report confirming the seized substance was liquor was not produced in court. Applying settled criminal law principles that suspicion cannot substitute proof and doubts must favor the accused, the court granted acquittal. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  4. 09-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Jm I

  5. 12-Feb-2026

    Daliy OrderView PDF

  6. 12-Feb-2026

    Examination under section 313 Cr.P.C

    Jm I

  7. 15-Dec-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  8. 03-Nov-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. 847/2025

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The Judicial Magistrate Court in Raghunathpur, Purulia acquitted Dipak Mandal of charges under Section 46A(c) of the Bengal Excise Act for illegal possession and sale of liquor. The court found that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt due to critical evidentiary gaps: all prosecution witnesses (police personnel) admitted inability to identify seized articles, no independent local witnesses were examined, and crucially, the chemical examination report confirming the seized substance was liquor was not produced in court. Applying settled criminal law principles that suspicion cannot substitute proof and doubts must favor the accused, the court granted acquittal. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case