The State of Gujarat vs AKHABHAI @ ASHOKBHAI KALUBHAI MANDURYA Advocate - P.M.RATHOD — 68/2020
Case under Gujarat (bombay) Animal Preservation Act, 1954 Section 5,6,6(b),(1),(2),(3),6(K),8,10. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 02nd May 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJBT050000942020
Filing Number
68/2020
Filing Date
07-03-2020
Registration No
68/2020
Registration Date
07-03-2020
Court
TALUKA COURT, BARWALA
Judge
1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Decision Date
02nd May 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL
FIR Details
FIR Number
04
Police Station
BARVALA POLICE STATION – BOTAD DISTRICT
Year
2017
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
The State of Gujarat
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
AKHABHAI @ ASHOKBHAI KALUBHAI MANDURYA Advocate - P.M.RATHOD
RAGHUBHAI SONDABHAI SATIYA
SAHIL @ FIROJSHA BHIKHUSHA FAKIR
Hearing History
Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Disposed
FINAL ARGUMENTS
FINAL ARGUMENTS
FINAL ARGUMENTS
FINAL ARGUMENTS
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 02-05-2026 | Disposed |
| 15-04-2026 | FINAL ARGUMENTS |
| 16-03-2026 | FINAL ARGUMENTS |
| 16-02-2026 | FINAL ARGUMENTS |
| 13-01-2026 | FINAL ARGUMENTS |
Final Orders / Judgements
CASE SUMMARY: Criminal Case No. 68/2020 The Gujarat High Court acquitted three accused of animal cruelty charges under the Gujarat Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1954, finding insufficient evidence. The State failed to establish that the accused had tied animals without food/water in their vehicle during a police raid. The court held that witness testimony was contradictory, investigative evidence was weak, and crucial corroborating facts regarding animal custody and seizure procedures were missing from the record. Consequently, the benefit of reasonable doubt was granted to the accused. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
CASE SUMMARY: Criminal Case No. 68/2020 The Gujarat High Court acquitted three accused of animal cruelty charges under the Gujarat Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1954, finding insufficient evidence. The State failed to establish that the accused had tied animals without food/water in their vehicle during a police raid. The court held that witness testimony was contradictory, investigative evidence was weak, and crucial corroborating facts regarding animal custody and seizure procedures were missing from the record. Consequently, the benefit of reasonable doubt was granted to the accused. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts