Government of Gujarat vs DHARMESHKUMAR ALIAS DHAMO ALIAS BHAVESH LEBUJI RABHAJI TERVADIYA(THAKOR) Advocate - M S JOSHI — 45/2025
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 363,366,114. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 02nd April 2026.
SC - SESSIONS CASE
CNR: GJBK010021152025
Filing Number
45/2025
Filing Date
13-Jun-2025
Registration No
45/2025
Registration Date
13-Jun-2025
Court
DISTRICT COURT PALANPUR
Judge
1-Principal District Judge
Decision Date
02-Apr-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL
Last updated 27-May-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
11195024240102
Police Station
GADH POLICE STATION - BANASKANTHA DISTRICT
Year
2024
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Government of Gujarat
Adv. R P VAISHNAV
Respondent(s)
-
1.DHARMESHKUMAR ALIAS DHAMO ALIAS BHAVESH LEBUJI RABHAJI TERVADIYA(THAKOR) Advocate - M S JOSHI
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
02-Apr-2026
Judegement
Case Summary: State of Gujarat v. Dharmeshkumar (Sessions Case 45/2025) Court Decision: The accused, Dharmeshkumar (alias Dhamo, alias Bhavesh) Lebuji Tervadiya, was acquitted of charges under IPC Sections 363, 366, 114 and GPTA Section 135. Key Reasoning: The court found that the prosecution failed to establish beyond reasonable doubt that the accused forcibly abducted a woman (Bhogbannaar) or her child against their will. While the FIR alleged the accused, with co-accused assistance, forcibly took away the woman and child using weapons, the court's detailed analysis of witness testimonies revealed critical inconsistencies: the woman herself testified she willingly left her first husband's house and went with the accused of her own accord; family members who claimed to witness the abduction couldn't identify the alleged perpetrators or describe the actual incident convincingly; and no credible evidence substantiated forced abduction or the use of weapons during the incident. The court concluded the evidence was insufficient to prove the essential elements of kidnapping/abduction charges. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
02-Apr-2026
Disposed
Principal District Judge
-
17-Mar-2026
Judgement
Principal District Judge
-
12-Mar-2026
Further Statement
Principal District Judge
-
05-Mar-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal District Judge
-
25-Feb-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal District Judge
-
16-Feb-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal District Judge
-
31-Jan-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal District Judge
-
13-Jan-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal District Judge
-
06-Jan-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal District Judge
-
19-Dec-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal District Judge
-
29-Nov-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal District Judge
-
17-Nov-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal District Judge
-
03-Nov-2025
Framing Of Charge/Plea
Principal District Judge
-
30-Sep-2025
Framing Of Charge/Plea
Principal District Judge
-
26-Aug-2025
Process To Accused
Principal District Judge
-
07-Aug-2025
Process To Accused
Principal District Judge
-
24-Jul-2025
Process To Accused
Principal District Judge
-
04-Jul-2025
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
13-Jun-2025
Case filed
Registration No. 45/2025
Case Summary: State of Gujarat v. Dharmeshkumar (Sessions Case 45/2025) Court Decision: The accused, Dharmeshkumar (alias Dhamo, alias Bhavesh) Lebuji Tervadiya, was acquitted of charges under IPC Sections 363, 366, 114 and GPTA Section 135. Key Reasoning: The court found that the prosecution failed to establish beyond reasonable doubt that the accused forcibly abducted a woman (Bhogbannaar) or her child against their will. While the FIR alleged the accused, with co-accused assistance, forcibly took away the woman and child using weapons, the court's detailed analysis of witness testimonies revealed critical inconsistencies: the woman herself testified she willingly left her first husband's house and went with the accused of her own accord; family members who claimed to witness the abduction couldn't identify the alleged perpetrators or describe the actual incident convincingly; and no credible evidence substantiated forced abduction or the use of weapons during the incident. The court concluded the evidence was insufficient to prove the essential elements of kidnapping/abduction charges. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts