Government of Gujarat vs MANSUGBHAI KARAMSHIBHAI PARMAR Advocate - C H SOLANKI — 280/2026
Case under The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 115(2),296(2). Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 13th March 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJBK060003372026
Filing Number
280/2026
Filing Date
19-Feb-2026
Registration No
280/2026
Registration Date
19-Feb-2026
Court
TALUKA COURT, DEODAR
Judge
4-Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM
Decision Date
13-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL
Last updated 23-Apr-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
11996003260015
Police Station
DEODAR POLICE STATION - BANASKANTHA DISTRICT
Year
2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Government of Gujarat
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
-
1.MANSUGBHAI KARAMSHIBHAI PARMAR Advocate - C H SOLANKI
-
2.BHAVESHBHAI MANSUGBHAI PARMAR
Adv. C H SOLANKI
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
13-Mar-2026
JudegementView PDF
Court Decision Summary This Gujarati criminal judgment (Case No. 280/2026, decided March 13, 2026) acquits the two accused of charges under IPC Sections 115(2), 288(2), and Gujarat Police Act Section 133, finding insufficient evidence that they caused grievous injury to the complainant. The court determined that the complainant and witnesses' testimonies contained significant contradictions and lacked corroborating evidence to establish the alleged assault beyond reasonable doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
13-Mar-2026
Disposed
Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM
-
11-Mar-2026
Further Statement
Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM
-
09-Mar-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM
-
05-Mar-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
19-Feb-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 280/2026
Court Decision Summary This Gujarati criminal judgment (Case No. 280/2026, decided March 13, 2026) acquits the two accused of charges under IPC Sections 115(2), 288(2), and Gujarat Police Act Section 133, finding insufficient evidence that they caused grievous injury to the complainant. The court determined that the complainant and witnesses' testimonies contained significant contradictions and lacked corroborating evidence to establish the alleged assault beyond reasonable doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts