STATE OF WEST BENGAL vs AMARESH MONDAL AND ANR — 113/2025
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 341,325,307,506,34. Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 11th March 2026.
Sessions Trial
CNR: WBSP040003442024
Filing Number
143/2024
Filing Date
22-05-2024
Registration No
113/2025
Registration Date
23-09-2024
Court
Additional District Judge, Alipur, South 24 Parganas
Judge
1-17 Th ADJ
Decision Date
11th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ACQUITTED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
STATE OF WEST BENGAL
Adv. P.P
Respondent(s)
AMARESH MONDAL AND ANR
TUMPA MONDAL
Hearing History
Judge: 1-17 Th ADJ
Disposed
Argument / Further Argument
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 11-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 10-03-2026 | Argument / Further Argument |
| 09-03-2026 | Evidence |
| 06-03-2026 | Evidence |
| 02-02-2026 | Evidence |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary The Additional District & Sessions Judge, Alipore, acquitted both accused persons—Amaresh Mondal and Tumpa Mondal—of charges under IPC Sections 325/307/506/34 (voluntarily causing hurt, attempt to murder, criminal intimidation, and criminal act by common intention). The court found that the prosecution miserably failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, as the complainant/injured party contradicted the prosecution narrative and provided no substantive evidence implicating the accused. The court held the prosecution's evidence insufficient to establish guilt, comparing it to "a blank and barren canvas" on which no guilt portrait could be painted. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
Case Summary The Additional District & Sessions Judge, Alipore, acquitted both accused persons—Amaresh Mondal and Tumpa Mondal—of charges under IPC Sections 325/307/506/34 (voluntarily causing hurt, attempt to murder, criminal intimidation, and criminal act by common intention). The court found that the prosecution miserably failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, as the complainant/injured party contradicted the prosecution narrative and provided no substantive evidence implicating the accused. The court held the prosecution's evidence insufficient to establish guilt, comparing it to "a blank and barren canvas" on which no guilt portrait could be painted. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts