THE STATE OF GUJARAT vs SATVIRBHAI @ SATUBHA AMRUBHAI DHADHAL Advocate - V B DHADHAL — 79/2025
Case under Public Gambling Act, 1867 [section 1 18] Section 12. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 13th March 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJBT020001642025
Filing Number
79/2025
Filing Date
08-01-2025
Registration No
79/2025
Registration Date
08-01-2025
Court
CIVIL COURT, BOTAD
Judge
3-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE
Decision Date
13th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL
FIR Details
FIR Number
11190002240631
Police Station
BOTAD TOWN POLICE STATION – BOTAD DISTRICT
Year
2024
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
THE STATE OF GUJARAT
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
SATVIRBHAI @ SATUBHA AMRUBHAI DHADHAL Advocate - V B DHADHAL
ANILBHAI @ KHATI BHUPATBHAI KALIYA
Adv. V B DHADHAL
NAYANBHAI @ BHIMO AMRUTBHAI RANGPARA
Adv. V B DHADHAL
Hearing History
Judge: 3-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE
Disposed
JUDGEMENT
FINAL ARGUMENTS
FINAL ARGUMENTS
FINAL ARGUMENTS
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 13-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 07-03-2026 | JUDGEMENT |
| 19-02-2026 | FINAL ARGUMENTS |
| 31-01-2026 | FINAL ARGUMENTS |
| 17-01-2026 | FINAL ARGUMENTS |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: 79/2025 - STATE OF GUJARAT v. SATVIRBHAI & OTHERS Court Decision: The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate acquitted all three accused (Satvirbhai, Anilbhai, and Nayanbhai) of gambling charges under Section 12 of the Gambling Act, finding the prosecution failed to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The court held that the complainant's testimony lacked corroboration from independent witnesses, the panchnama (seizure document) witness provided no substantive evidence beyond acknowledging his signature, and critical procedural details remained unverified, making the case unreliable despite seized cash and playing cards. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: 79/2025 - STATE OF GUJARAT v. SATVIRBHAI & OTHERS Court Decision: The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate acquitted all three accused (Satvirbhai, Anilbhai, and Nayanbhai) of gambling charges under Section 12 of the Gambling Act, finding the prosecution failed to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The court held that the complainant's testimony lacked corroboration from independent witnesses, the panchnama (seizure document) witness provided no substantive evidence beyond acknowledging his signature, and critical procedural details remained unverified, making the case unreliable despite seized cash and playing cards. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts