State of West Bengal vs Bijoy Modi — 962/2025
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 117(2),126(2),324(4). Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 16th April 2026.
Gr Case
CNR: WBPU060014382025
e-Filing Number
12-12-2025
Filing Number
1433/2025
Filing Date
12-Dec-2025
Registration No
962/2025
Registration Date
12-Dec-2025
Court
Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Raghunathpur, Purulia
Judge
4-Jm I
Decision Date
16-Apr-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ACQUITTED
Last updated 05-May-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
146
Police Station
NETURIA
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.State of West Bengal
Adv. APP In charge
Respondent(s)
-
1.Bijoy Modi
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
16-Apr-2026
Daliy OrderView PDF
-
16-Apr-2026
JudgementView PDF
Judgment Summary The Judicial Magistrate Court in Raghunathpur, Purulia acquitted accused Bijoy Modi of charges under BNS Sections 126(2)/117(2)/324(4) (property damage, criminal intimidation, and voluntarily causing hurt). The court found that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt: the injured complainant (PW2) retracted his allegations and expressed no objection to the accused's release, while the other witness (PW1) provided only formal testimony. Additionally, the treating doctor was not examined to substantiate the injury claims, leaving no corroborative evidence to establish guilt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
16-Apr-2026
Disposed
Jm I
-
31-Mar-2026
Examination under section 313 Cr.P.C
Jm I
-
10-Mar-2026
Daliy OrderView PDF
-
10-Mar-2026
Examination under section 313 Cr.P.C
Jm I
-
02-Feb-2026
Daliy OrderView PDF
-
02-Feb-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
12-Dec-2025
Case filed
Registration No. 962/2025
Judgment Summary The Judicial Magistrate Court in Raghunathpur, Purulia acquitted accused Bijoy Modi of charges under BNS Sections 126(2)/117(2)/324(4) (property damage, criminal intimidation, and voluntarily causing hurt). The court found that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt: the injured complainant (PW2) retracted his allegations and expressed no objection to the accused's release, while the other witness (PW1) provided only formal testimony. Additionally, the treating doctor was not examined to substantiate the injury claims, leaving no corroborative evidence to establish guilt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts