THE STATE OF GUJARAT vs HARESHBHAI HIMATBHAI JAPADIYA Advocate - S P TILVANI — 776/2025
Case under The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 106(1),281. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 30th April 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJBT030011072025
Filing Number
776/2025
Filing Date
11-04-2025
Registration No
776/2025
Registration Date
11-04-2025
Court
TALUKA COURT, GADHADA
Judge
2-ADDI CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Decision Date
30th April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL
FIR Details
FIR Number
11190004250221
Police Station
GADHADA POLICE STATION – BOTAD DISTRICT
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
THE STATE OF GUJARAT
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
HARESHBHAI HIMATBHAI JAPADIYA Advocate - S P TILVANI
Hearing History
Judge: 2-ADDI CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Disposed
JUDGEMENT
JUDGEMENT
FINAL ARGUMENTS
FINAL ARGUMENTS
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 30-04-2026 | Disposed |
| 17-04-2026 | JUDGEMENT |
| 10-04-2026 | JUDGEMENT |
| 20-03-2026 | FINAL ARGUMENTS |
| 13-03-2026 | FINAL ARGUMENTS |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: Criminal Case No. 776/2025 The court acquitted defendant Hareshbhai Himatbhai Japadiya of charges under BNS Section 106(1) (death by negligence), Section 281 (rash driving), and Motor Vehicle Act Sections 177, 184, and 134 in connection with a fatal accident on February 17, 2025. The prosecution failed to establish that the accused drove recklessly or negligently; the complainant could not identify the vehicle involved or provide concrete evidence of dangerous driving, and corroborating witnesses had no direct knowledge of the incident. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: Criminal Case No. 776/2025 The court acquitted defendant Hareshbhai Himatbhai Japadiya of charges under BNS Section 106(1) (death by negligence), Section 281 (rash driving), and Motor Vehicle Act Sections 177, 184, and 134 in connection with a fatal accident on February 17, 2025. The prosecution failed to establish that the accused drove recklessly or negligently; the complainant could not identify the vehicle involved or provide concrete evidence of dangerous driving, and corroborating witnesses had no direct knowledge of the incident. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts