Government of Gujarat vs JUTHAJI SURTAJI RAJPUT Advocate - V A GHASURA — 15/2024

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 143,147,148,149,307,323,325,294(B),506(2),. Status: EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION. Next hearing: 07th July 2026.

SC - SESSIONS CASE

CNR: GJBK180016392024

EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION

Next Hearing

07th July 2026

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

15/2024

Filing Date

01-07-2024

Registration No

15/2024

Registration Date

01-07-2024

Court

ADDL. DISTRICT COURT, Deesa

Judge

3-6th ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE

FIR Details

FIR Number

11195018230754

Police Station

DHANERA POLICE STATION - BANASKANTHA DISTRICT

Year

2023

Acts & Sections

INDIAN PENAL CODE Section 143,147,148,149,307,323,325,294(B),506(2),
GUJARAT (BOMBAY) POLICE ACT, 1951 Section 135,

Petitioner(s)

Government of Gujarat

Adv. V B KANSARA

Respondent(s)

JUTHAJI SURTAJI RAJPUT Advocate - V A GHASURA

DEVAJI SURTAJI RAJPUT

ASHUJI JUTHAJI RAJPUT

JAYSINH @ JESHAJI RAJPUT

VENAJI LAKHAJI RAJPUT

PAHADSINH LAKHAJI RAJPUT

Hearing History

Judge: 3-6th ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE

15-04-2026

EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION

09-03-2026

EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION

19-01-2026

EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION

17-11-2025

EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION

02-09-2025

EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION

Interim Orders

19-01-2026
ORDER
15-04-2026
ORDER
15-04-2026
ORDER

The accused's statement has been recorded under Section 313 CrPC in Sessions Case No. 15/2024. The accused denied all charges and claimed the evidence was fabricated by police, stating that he signed documents without understanding their contents and that proper procedures were not followed during the investigation. The court has recorded his detailed examination and oral arguments from both the prosecution and defense counsel. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

The accused's statement has been recorded under Section 313 CrPC in Sessions Case No. 15/2024. The accused denied all charges and claimed the evidence was fabricated by police, stating that he signed documents without understanding their contents and that proper procedures were not followed during the investigation. The court has recorded his detailed examination and oral arguments from both the prosecution and defense counsel. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

ADDL. DISTRICT COURT, Deesa All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case