THE STATE OF GUJARAT vs LAXMANBHAI KARMASHIBHAI KANANI Advocate - R B PATEL — 170/2025

Case under The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 115(2),352,351(3),54. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 15th April 2026.

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJAH230002582025

Case disposed

Filing Number

170/2025

Filing Date

04-07-2025

Registration No

170/2025

Registration Date

04-07-2025

Court

Taluka Court, Dholera

Judge

1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C

Decision Date

15th April 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL

FIR Details

FIR Number

11192019250052

Police Station

DHOLERA POLICE STATION - AHMEDABAD DISTRICT

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

THE BHARATIYA NYAYA SANHITA, 2023 Section 115(2),352,351(3),54
GUJARAT (BOMBAY) POLICE ACT, 1951 Section 135

Petitioner(s)

THE STATE OF GUJARAT

Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

LAXMANBHAI KARMASHIBHAI KANANI Advocate - R B PATEL

FALJIBHAI KARMASHIBHAI KANANI

Adv. R B PATEL

Hearing History

Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C

15-04-2026

Disposed

08-04-2026

FURTHER STATEMENT

01-04-2026

EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION

11-03-2026

EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION

11-02-2026

EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION

Final Orders / Judgements

15-04-2026
JUDEGEMENT

Summary of Court Decision The court acquitted both accused (Lakshman Bhai and Falji Bhai) of charges under BNS Sections 115(2), 352, 351(3), 54 and GP Act Section 135 (criminal intimidation and wrongful restraint). The court found that the complainant and witnesses failed to substantiate their allegations beyond reasonable doubt—their testimony was inconsistent, uncorroborated by medical evidence or documentary proof, and the panchnamas lacked credibility. The accused were ordered to post bail of ₹5,000 each with personal bonds. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary of Court Decision The court acquitted both accused (Lakshman Bhai and Falji Bhai) of charges under BNS Sections 115(2), 352, 351(3), 54 and GP Act Section 135 (criminal intimidation and wrongful restraint). The court found that the complainant and witnesses failed to substantiate their allegations beyond reasonable doubt—their testimony was inconsistent, uncorroborated by medical evidence or documentary proof, and the panchnamas lacked credibility. The accused were ordered to post bail of ₹5,000 each with personal bonds. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

Taluka Court, Dholera All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case