RAJIV @ RAJU vs THE STATE OF HARYANA STATE OF HARYANA HOME SECRETARY — Crl.A. No. 1256/2008

Case under Section II-B. Status: Disposed.

Disposed

CNR: SCIN010251472007

Filing Date

30-Aug-2007

Registration No

Crl.A. No. 1256/2008

Diary Number

25147/2007

Order Date

07-Feb-2018

Document Type

ROP - of Main Case

Disposal Type

Allowed

Last updated 01-Jul-2026

Acts & Sections

Section II-B

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.RAJIV @ RAJU

    Adv. AMIT SHARMA

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.THE STATE OF HARYANA STATE OF HARYANA HOME SECRETARY

    Adv. MONIKA GUSAIN (Dead / Retired / Elevated) MONIKA GUSAIN (Dead / Retired / Elevated)

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 07-Feb-2018

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  3. 07-Feb-2018

    Fixed Date by Court

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice S.A. Bobde and Hon'ble Mr. Justice L. Nageswara Rao

  4. 01-Feb-2018

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  5. 01-Feb-2018

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 14-Sep-2012

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  7. 25-Jul-2012

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  8. 19-Aug-2011

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  9. 11-Aug-2011

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  10. 08-Jul-2011

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  11. 19-Apr-2011

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  12. 25-Aug-2008
  13. 11-Aug-2008

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  14. 04-Aug-2008

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  15. 21-Jul-2008
  16. 09-Jul-2008

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  17. 16-May-2008

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  18. 14-May-2008

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  19. 30-Aug-2007

    Case filed

    Registration No. Crl.A. No. 1256/2008

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: Rajiv @ Raju v. State of Haryana (Crl.A. No. 1256/2008) Outcome: The Supreme Court acquitted appellants Rajiv @ Raju and Suneet, allowing both criminal appeals and setting aside the High Court's conviction. The Court found the identification evidence and confessions severely flawed—no test identification parade was conducted despite the midnight robbery occurring under insufficient light, and the two conflicting confessions (one claiming the money was spent, the next claiming it was hidden) created serious doubts about investigation integrity. The bail bonds were discharged. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case