THE STATE vs RAHUL S/O NARBHERAM TULSHIDAS PARMAR Advocate - V M GOHEL — 227/2021

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 395,397. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 06th May 2026.

Case disposed

SC - SESSIONS CASE

CNR: GJAH240029342021

Filing Number

227/2021

Filing Date

14-Oct-2021

Registration No

227/2021

Registration Date

14-Oct-2021

Court

Addl. Court Dholka

Judge

2-8th Addl District Judge

Decision Date

06-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL

Last updated 16-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

11192010200238

Police Station

BAGODARA POLICE STATION - AHMEDABAD DISTRICT

Year

2020

Acts & Sections

Indian Penal Code Section 395,397

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.THE STATE

    Adv. J C PATEL

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.RAHUL S/O NARBHERAM TULSHIDAS PARMAR Advocate - V M GOHEL

  2. 2.SHIVAM @ SHIVO S/O BHAVESH PRAVINBHAI PATEL

    Adv. V M GOHEL

  3. 3.DUPESH S/O TRIBHOVANBHAI SAVABHAI JADAV

    Adv. V M GOHEL

  4. 4.ANITKUMAR RAMESHBHAI SOLANKI

    Adv. P R CHAUHAN

  5. 5.KIRAN @ KISHAN S/O LALITBHAI PARMAR

    Adv. V M GOHEL

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 06-May-2026

    JudegementView PDF

    Summary The court acquitted all five accused of charges under IPC Sections 395 and 397 (dacoity), finding that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. While the complainant's evidence established that GEO SIM cards worth approximately Rs. 94,500 were looted from his courier vehicle on June 22, 2020, the complainant and key witnesses could not identify the accused and no direct evidence linked them to the crime. The court held that without proper identification and corroborating evidence, the prosecution's case was insufficient to convict. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 06-May-2026

    Disposed

    8th Addl District Judge

  4. 05-May-2026

    Judgement

    8th Addl District Judge

  5. 30-Apr-2026

    Judgement

    8th Addl District Judge

  6. 23-Apr-2026

    Judgement

    8th Addl District Judge

  7. 15-Apr-2026

    Final Arguments

    8th Addl District Judge

  8. 06-Apr-2026

    Final Arguments

    8th Addl District Judge

  9. 17-Mar-2026

    Final Arguments

    8th Addl District Judge

  10. 11-Mar-2026

    Final Arguments

    8th Addl District Judge

  11. 05-Mar-2026

    Final Arguments

    8th Addl District Judge

  12. 27-Feb-2026

    Further Statement

    8th Addl District Judge

  13. 23-Feb-2026

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    8th Addl District Judge

  14. 18-Feb-2026

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    8th Addl District Judge

  15. 16-Feb-2026

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    8th Addl District Judge

  16. 11-Feb-2026

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    8th Addl District Judge

  17. 28-Jan-2026

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    8th Addl District Judge

  18. 05-Jan-2026

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    9th Addl District Judge

  19. 10-Dec-2025

    Framing Of Charge/Plea

    9th Addl District Judge

  20. 26-Nov-2025

    Framing Of Charge/Plea

    9th Addl District Judge

  21. 04-Nov-2025

    Framing Of Charge/Plea

    9th Addl District Judge

  22. 10-Oct-2025

    Framing Of Charge/Plea

    9th Addl District Judge

  23. 22-Sep-2025

    Framing Of Charge/Plea

    9th Addl District Judge

  24. 09-Sep-2025

    Framing Of Charge/Plea

    9th Addl District Judge

  25. 19-Aug-2025

    Framing Of Charge/Plea

    9th Addl District Judge

  26. 23-Jul-2025

    Framing Of Charge/Plea

    9th Addl District Judge

  27. 20-Jun-2025

    Framing Of Charge/Plea

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  28. 12-May-2025

    Framing Of Charge/Plea

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  29. 09-Apr-2025

    Framing Of Charge/Plea

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  30. 06-Mar-2025

    Framing Of Charge/Plea

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  31. 13-Feb-2025

    Process To Accused

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  32. 13-Jan-2025

    Process To Accused

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  33. 17-Dec-2024

    Process To Accused

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  34. 18-Nov-2024

    Process To Accused

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  35. 15-Oct-2024

    Process To Accused

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  36. 03-Sep-2024

    Process To Accused

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  37. 01-Aug-2024

    Process To Accused

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  38. 01-Jul-2024

    Process To Accused

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  39. 10-Jun-2024

    Process To Accused

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  40. 25-Apr-2024

    Process To Accused

    3rd Addl District Judge

  41. 11-Mar-2024

    Process To Accused

    3rd Addl District Judge

  42. 24-Jan-2024

    Process To Accused

    3rd Addl District Judge

  43. 13-Dec-2023

    Process To Accused

    3rd Addl District Judge

  44. 21-Nov-2023

    Process To Accused

    3rd Addl District Judge

  45. 04-Oct-2023

    Process To Accused

    3rd Addl District Judge

  46. 29-Aug-2023

    Process To Accused

    3rd Addl District Judge

  47. 28-Jul-2023

    Process To Accused

    3rd Addl District Judge

  48. 19-Jun-2023

    Process To Accused

    3rd Addl District Judge

  49. 18-May-2023

    Process To Accused

    6th Addl District Judge

  50. 12-Apr-2023

    Process To Accused

    6th Addl District Judge

  51. 06-Mar-2023

    Process To Accused

    6th Addl District Judge

  52. 20-Jan-2023

    Process To Accused

    6th Addl District Judge

  53. 18-Nov-2022

    Process To Accused

    7th Addl District Judge

  54. 06-Sep-2022

    Process To Accused

    7th Addl District Judge

  55. 07-Jul-2022

    Process To Accused

    7th Addl District Judge

  56. 16-May-2022

    Process To Accused

    9th Addl District Judge

  57. 04-Apr-2022

    Process To Accused

    9th Addl District Judge

  58. 25-Jan-2022

    Process To Accused

    9th Addl District Judge

  59. 04-Dec-2021

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  60. 14-Oct-2021

    Case filed

    Registration No. 227/2021

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The court acquitted all five accused of charges under IPC Sections 395 and 397 (dacoity), finding that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. While the complainant's evidence established that GEO SIM cards worth approximately Rs. 94,500 were looted from his courier vehicle on June 22, 2020, the complainant and key witnesses could not identify the accused and no direct evidence linked them to the crime. The court held that without proper identification and corroborating evidence, the prosecution's case was insufficient to convict. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case