GOVERNMENT OF GUJARAT vs AMRATBHAI AYDANBHAI BHETOR Advocate - J V TRIVEDI — 651/2023
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 323,294KH,506-2,114. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 10th March 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJBK090008322023
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
651/2023
Filing Date
25-05-2023
Registration No
651/2023
Registration Date
25-05-2023
Court
TALUKA COURT, DHANERA
Judge
1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Decision Date
10th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL
FIR Details
FIR Number
11195018210036
Police Station
DHANERA POLICE STATION - BANASKANTHA DISTRICT
Year
2021
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
GOVERNMENT OF GUJARAT
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
AMRATBHAI AYDANBHAI BHETOR Advocate - J V TRIVEDI
RAHULBHAI AMRATBHAI BHETOR
JITENDRABHAI NEMABHAI BHETOR
VINODBHAI NEMABHAI BHETOR
Hearing History
Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Disposed
JUDGEMENT
JUDGEMENT
JUDGEMENT
JUDGEMENT
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 10-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 09-03-2026 | JUDGEMENT | |
| 09-02-2026 | JUDGEMENT | |
| 05-02-2026 | JUDGEMENT | |
| 15-01-2026 | JUDGEMENT |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary The Dhanera First Class Judicial Magistrate Court acquitted four accused persons under IPC Sections 323, 294(b), 506(2), 114, and GP Act Section 135, finding insufficient evidence to prove the charges of assault, abusive language, and criminal intimidation beyond reasonable doubt. The court noted that the complainant's evidence and the Panchayat record did not credibly establish that the accused had beaten the victim or made death threats, as the accused's cross-examination testimony contradicted the prosecution's allegations without corroboration. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary The Dhanera First Class Judicial Magistrate Court acquitted four accused persons under IPC Sections 323, 294(b), 506(2), 114, and GP Act Section 135, finding insufficient evidence to prove the charges of assault, abusive language, and criminal intimidation beyond reasonable doubt. The court noted that the complainant's evidence and the Panchayat record did not credibly establish that the accused had beaten the victim or made death threats, as the accused's cross-examination testimony contradicted the prosecution's allegations without corroboration. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts