THE STATE OF GUJARAT vs AYAN ANISHMIYA PATHAN Advocate - G M PATEL — 4/2026
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 379(A). Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 10th April 2026.
SC - SESSIONS CASE
CNR: GJAR010000062026
Filing Number
4/2026
Filing Date
01-01-2026
Registration No
4/2026
Registration Date
01-01-2026
Court
DISTRICT COURT, MODASA
Judge
1-ADDL.DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE
Decision Date
10th April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL
FIR Details
FIR Number
561
Police Station
MODASA POLICE STATION – ARVALLI @ MODASA DISTRICT
Year
2023
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
THE STATE OF GUJARAT
Adv. T K RATHOD
Respondent(s)
AYAN ANISHMIYA PATHAN Advocate - G M PATEL
Hearing History
Judge: 1-ADDL.DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE
Disposed
FINAL ARGUMENTS
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 10-04-2026 | Disposed |
| 27-03-2026 | FINAL ARGUMENTS |
| 13-03-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION |
| 28-02-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION |
| 16-02-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: Sessions Case 4/2026 Court Decision: The accused, Ayan Anishmiya Pathan, is acquitted and discharged of theft charges under IPC Section 379(a). The court found insufficient evidence to prove the accused's guilt beyond reasonable doubt, as the prosecution failed to establish the stolen mobile phone's recovery directly from the accused or provide credible witness testimony linking the accused to the crime. Key Reasoning: The court determined that the prosecution's case relied heavily on circumstantial evidence and witness statements that contained contradictions and lacked corroboration. Critical gaps included inability to definitively identify who stole the mobile phone, weak chain of custody for recovered evidence, and witnesses' admissions of darkness/inability to identify the actual perpetrator during the incident. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: Sessions Case 4/2026 Court Decision: The accused, Ayan Anishmiya Pathan, is acquitted and discharged of theft charges under IPC Section 379(a). The court found insufficient evidence to prove the accused's guilt beyond reasonable doubt, as the prosecution failed to establish the stolen mobile phone's recovery directly from the accused or provide credible witness testimony linking the accused to the crime. Key Reasoning: The court determined that the prosecution's case relied heavily on circumstantial evidence and witness statements that contained contradictions and lacked corroboration. Critical gaps included inability to definitively identify who stole the mobile phone, weak chain of custody for recovered evidence, and witnesses' admissions of darkness/inability to identify the actual perpetrator during the incident. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts