GUJARAT GOVERNMENT vs JAYESHBHAI ISHWARBHAI PARMAR Advocate - P M RATHOD — 374/2023
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 279,337,338. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 02nd May 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJBT050004552023
Filing Number
374/2023
Filing Date
21-07-2023
Registration No
374/2023
Registration Date
21-07-2023
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
11190001230036
Police Station
BARVALA POLICE STATION – BOTAD DISTRICT
Year
2023
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
GUJARAT GOVERNMENT
Adv. J P MUNDHVA
Respondent(s)
JAYESHBHAI ISHWARBHAI PARMAR Advocate - P M RATHOD
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 |
| 13-02-2026 | FINAL ARGUMENTS |
| 19-01-2026 | FINAL ARGUMENTS |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary of Criminal Case No. 374/2023 Gujarat Government v. Jayeshbhai Ishwarbhai Parmar The court acquitted the accused of charges under IPC Sections 279, 336, 337, 338 and Motor Vehicles Act Sections 177, 184, finding that the prosecution failed to establish rash and negligent driving causing injuries. The judgment emphasized that bare allegations and medical certificates without direct eyewitness testimony proving the accused's negligent/reckless conduct insufficient; circumstantial evidence and victim statements alone cannot establish criminal negligence beyond reasonable doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary of Criminal Case No. 374/2023 Gujarat Government v. Jayeshbhai Ishwarbhai Parmar The court acquitted the accused of charges under IPC Sections 279, 336, 337, 338 and Motor Vehicles Act Sections 177, 184, finding that the prosecution failed to establish rash and negligent driving causing injuries. The judgment emphasized that bare allegations and medical certificates without direct eyewitness testimony proving the accused's negligent/reckless conduct insufficient; circumstantial evidence and victim statements alone cannot establish criminal negligence beyond reasonable doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts