The State of Gujarat vs CHETANBHAI DHANJIBHAI MAKWANA Advocate - P M RATHOD — 55/2026
Case under The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 281,106(1),125(A). Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 01st April 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJBT050001112026
Filing Number
55/2026
Filing Date
20-02-2026
Registration No
55/2026
Registration Date
20-02-2026
Court
TALUKA COURT, BARWALA
Judge
1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Decision Date
01st April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL
FIR Details
FIR Number
11190001250347
Police Station
BARVALA POLICE STATION – BOTAD DISTRICT
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
The State of Gujarat
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
CHETANBHAI DHANJIBHAI MAKWANA Advocate - P M RATHOD
Hearing History
Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Disposed
JUDGEMENT
FINAL ARGUMENTS
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 01-04-2026 | Disposed |
| 30-03-2026 | JUDGEMENT |
| 16-03-2026 | FINAL ARGUMENTS |
| 23-02-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION |
Final Orders / Judgements
The Magistrate's Court in Botad acquitted the accused, Chetanbhai Dhanjibhai Makwana, of charges under IPC Sections 281, 125(a), 106(1), and Motor Vehicles Act Sections 177, 184, 3, 181. The court found that while the accused was driving a motorcycle that resulted in an accident causing his wife's death, the prosecution failed to establish beyond reasonable doubt that he was driving recklessly or negligently in a manner endangering human life. The court noted mere carelessness or error of judgment is insufficient; criminal negligence requires gross culpability, which the evidence did not prove conclusively. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The Magistrate's Court in Botad acquitted the accused, Chetanbhai Dhanjibhai Makwana, of charges under IPC Sections 281, 125(a), 106(1), and Motor Vehicles Act Sections 177, 184, 3, 181. The court found that while the accused was driving a motorcycle that resulted in an accident causing his wife's death, the prosecution failed to establish beyond reasonable doubt that he was driving recklessly or negligently in a manner endangering human life. The court noted mere carelessness or error of judgment is insufficient; criminal negligence requires gross culpability, which the evidence did not prove conclusively. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts