STATE OF WEST BENGAL vs GOURI DEVI AND OTHERS — 3924/2025

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 341/323. Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 01st April 2026.

Case disposed

Gr Case

CNR: WBSP050104472025

Filing Number

10397/2025

Filing Date

22-Dec-2025

Registration No

3924/2025

Registration Date

22-Dec-2025

Court

Chief Judicial Magistrate, Alipur, South 24 Parganas

Judge

4-CJM

Decision Date

01-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ACQUITTED

Last updated 14-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Indian Penal Code Section 341/323

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF WEST BENGAL

    Adv. GOVT. PP.

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.GOURI DEVI AND OTHERS

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 01-Apr-2026

    JudgementView PDF

    Case Summary The Chief Judicial Magistrate at Alipore acquitted accused Gouri Devi and Sunil Prosad of charges under IPC Sections 341/323/114 (wrongful restraint and voluntarily causing hurt). The court found that the prosecution fatally failed to establish its case: the complainant did not appear despite repeated summons, prosecution witnesses testified they had no knowledge of the incident, no medical evidence was presented, and the investigating officer merely filed the FIR without substantive corroboration. The court held that mere suspicion cannot substitute for proof and the prosecution did not establish the essential ingredients of the offense beyond reasonable doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 01-Apr-2026

    Disposed

    CJM

  4. 24-Mar-2026

    Examination under section 313 Cr.P.C

    CJM

  5. 23-Mar-2026

    Evidence

    CJM

  6. 24-Feb-2026

    Evidence

    CJM

  7. 29-Dec-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  8. 22-Dec-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. 3924/2025

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary The Chief Judicial Magistrate at Alipore acquitted accused Gouri Devi and Sunil Prosad of charges under IPC Sections 341/323/114 (wrongful restraint and voluntarily causing hurt). The court found that the prosecution fatally failed to establish its case: the complainant did not appear despite repeated summons, prosecution witnesses testified they had no knowledge of the incident, no medical evidence was presented, and the investigating officer merely filed the FIR without substantive corroboration. The court held that mere suspicion cannot substitute for proof and the prosecution did not establish the essential ingredients of the offense beyond reasonable doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case