THE STATE OF GUJARAT vs AYAN ANISHMIYA PATHAN Advocate - G M PATEL — 5/2026

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 379(A). Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 10th April 2026.

Case disposed

SC - SESSIONS CASE

CNR: GJAR010000072026

Filing Number

5/2026

Filing Date

01-Jan-2026

Registration No

5/2026

Registration Date

01-Jan-2026

Court

DISTRICT COURT, MODASA

Judge

1-Addl.district And Sessions Judge

Decision Date

10-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL

Last updated 07-Jun-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

550

Police Station

MODASA POLICE STATION – ARVALLI @ MODASA DISTRICT

Year

2023

Acts & Sections

Indian Penal Code Section 379(A)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.THE STATE OF GUJARAT

    Adv. R J BHATI

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.AYAN ANISHMIYA PATHAN Advocate - G M PATEL

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 10-Apr-2026

    JudegementView PDF

    Case Summary: Sessions 5/2026 Court Decision: The accused, Ayan Anishmiya Pathan, is acquitted of charges under IPC Section 379 (theft). The court found insufficient evidence to prove the alleged mobile phone theft beyond reasonable doubt, as the prosecution failed to establish a conclusive chain of custody or unambiguous identification of the stolen device. Key Reasoning: Despite witness statements from the accused's relatives and investigating officers, critical evidentiary gaps undermined the case—specifically, the failure to definitively prove the phone seized matched the one allegedly stolen, and conflicting details regarding identification procedures. The court determined that the prosecution's case could not meet the required legal standard of proof. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 10-Apr-2026

    Disposed

    Addl.district And Sessions Judge

  4. 27-Mar-2026

    Final Arguments

    Addl.district And Sessions Judge

  5. 13-Mar-2026

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    2nd Addl District Judge

  6. 28-Feb-2026

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    2nd Addl District Judge

  7. 16-Feb-2026

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    2nd Addl District Judge

  8. 03-Feb-2026

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    2nd Addl District Judge

  9. 29-Jan-2026

    Opening Up Of Case By Prosecution

    2nd Addl District Judge

  10. 17-Jan-2026

    Opening Up Of Case By Prosecution

    2nd Addl District Judge

  11. 13-Jan-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  12. 01-Jan-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 5/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: Sessions 5/2026 Court Decision: The accused, Ayan Anishmiya Pathan, is acquitted of charges under IPC Section 379 (theft). The court found insufficient evidence to prove the alleged mobile phone theft beyond reasonable doubt, as the prosecution failed to establish a conclusive chain of custody or unambiguous identification of the stolen device. Key Reasoning: Despite witness statements from the accused's relatives and investigating officers, critical evidentiary gaps undermined the case—specifically, the failure to definitively prove the phone seized matched the one allegedly stolen, and conflicting details regarding identification procedures. The court determined that the prosecution's case could not meet the required legal standard of proof. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case