THE STATE OF GUJARAT vs MANITASINGH PANKAJSINGH SUGRIVSINGH Advocate - A B SIPAI — 119/2025

Case under The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 115(2),352,54. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 25th March 2026.

Case disposed

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJBH030003412025

Filing Number

119/2025

Filing Date

16-Jan-2025

Registration No

119/2025

Registration Date

16-Jan-2025

Court

TALUKA COURT, ANKLESVAR

Judge

1-Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

Decision Date

25-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL

Last updated 19-Jun-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

11199021241288

Police Station

ANKLESHWAR G.I.D.C. POLICE STATION - BHARUCH DISTRICT

Year

2024

Acts & Sections

The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 115(2),352,54
Gujarat (Bombay) Police Act, 1951 Section 135

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.THE STATE OF GUJARAT

    Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.MANITASINGH PANKAJSINGH SUGRIVSINGH Advocate - A B SIPAI

  2. 2.PANKAJSINGH SUGRIVSINGH

    Adv. A B SIPAI

  3. 3.SANGITA ABHILAS JAGJAHIR

    Adv. A B SIPAI

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 25-Mar-2026

    JudegementView PDF

    Case Summary: CC No. 119/2025 Court Decision: The court acquitted all accused persons under IPC Sections 115(2), 352, 54, and 135 (BNS equivalent), finding insufficient evidence to prove the charges. The State's prosecution failed to establish a direct link between the accused and alleged criminal conduct, relying on weak circumstantial evidence without corroborating witness testimony or credible documentation. Key Reasoning: The judge noted that while witness statements were recorded, they remained vague regarding the accused's involvement. The prosecution could not produce concrete evidence demonstrating the accused's guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and the court rejected attempts to construct a case based on incomplete investigative records. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 25-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  4. 17-Mar-2026

    Order

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  5. 18-Feb-2026

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  6. 03-Feb-2026

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  7. 23-Dec-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  8. 12-Nov-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  9. 30-Sep-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  10. 02-Sep-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  11. 21-Jul-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  12. 30-May-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  13. 25-Apr-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  14. 13-Mar-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  15. 11-Feb-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  16. 16-Jan-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. 119/2025

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: CC No. 119/2025 Court Decision: The court acquitted all accused persons under IPC Sections 115(2), 352, 54, and 135 (BNS equivalent), finding insufficient evidence to prove the charges. The State's prosecution failed to establish a direct link between the accused and alleged criminal conduct, relying on weak circumstantial evidence without corroborating witness testimony or credible documentation. Key Reasoning: The judge noted that while witness statements were recorded, they remained vague regarding the accused's involvement. The prosecution could not produce concrete evidence demonstrating the accused's guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and the court rejected attempts to construct a case based on incomplete investigative records. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case