VAGHELA MUKESHSINH GAMANSINH vs VAJESINH MADARSINH VAGHELA — 257/2026
Case under The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 281,125(a),125(b),106(1),. Disposed: Contested--REJECTED on 16th March 2026.
CRMA J - CRIMINAL MISC APPLICATION-JMFC
CNR: GJBK020051872026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
257/2026
Filing Date
26-02-2026
Registration No
257/2026
Registration Date
26-02-2026
Court
CIVIL COURT PALANPUR
Judge
5-4th ADDL. SR. CIVIL JUDGE & A.C.J.M.
Decision Date
16th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--REJECTED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
VAGHELA MUKESHSINH GAMANSINH
Adv. R V SOLANKI
Respondent(s)
VAJESINH MADARSINH VAGHELA
Hearing History
Judge: 5-4th ADDL. SR. CIVIL JUDGE & A.C.J.M.
Disposed
PROCESS TO OPPONENT
PROCESS TO OPPONENT
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 16-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 09-03-2026 | PROCESS TO OPPONENT | |
| 28-02-2026 | PROCESS TO OPPONENT |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary The 4th ACJM Court, Palanpur dismissed the accused's petition, finding that the complaint allegations establish cognizable offences under IPC sections 281, 125(a)-(b), 106(1), and IPC sections 177, 184, 233, involving rash/negligent driving causing death and related charges. The court held that a magistrate must verify the truth and veracity of allegations before ordering police investigation, applying Supreme Court precedents; here, credible evidence (medical records, witness statements, police reports) demonstrated the essential elements of the offences on first impression, making prosecution warranted and dismissing claims of abuse of process. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary The 4th ACJM Court, Palanpur dismissed the accused's petition, finding that the complaint allegations establish cognizable offences under IPC sections 281, 125(a)-(b), 106(1), and IPC sections 177, 184, 233, involving rash/negligent driving causing death and related charges. The court held that a magistrate must verify the truth and veracity of allegations before ordering police investigation, applying Supreme Court precedents; here, credible evidence (medical records, witness statements, police reports) demonstrated the essential elements of the offences on first impression, making prosecution warranted and dismissing claims of abuse of process. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts