Government of Gujarat vs NARANBHAI VIRAMBHAI BARIYA Advocate - R L VAGHELA — 631/2025
Case under The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 115(2),351(2),54. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTA on 07th April 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJDW030007272025
Filing Number
631/2025
Filing Date
26-06-2025
Registration No
631/2025
Registration Date
26-06-2025
Court
TALUKA COURT, KALYANPUR
Judge
1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Decision Date
07th April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTA
FIR Details
FIR Number
50201
Police Station
KALYANPUR POLICE STATION – DEVBHUMI DWARKA @ KHAMBHALIYA
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Government of Gujarat
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
NARANBHAI VIRAMBHAI BARIYA Advocate - R L VAGHELA
TAMUBEN W/O VIRAMBHAI HEMARAJBHAI BARIYA
Adv. R L VAGHELA
Hearing History
Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Disposed
JUDGEMENT
FURTHER STATEMENT
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 07-04-2026 | Disposed |
| 12-03-2026 | JUDGEMENT |
| 12-02-2026 | FURTHER STATEMENT |
| 13-01-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION |
| 02-12-2025 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary of Case 631/2025 The court acquitted the two accused under IPC Sections 115(2), 351(2), 54, and DP Act Section 135(1), finding insufficient credible evidence to support the prosecution's case. The court noted that while panch witnesses turned hostile and the complainant's testimony lacked corroboration from independent witnesses, the essential ingredients of the alleged offenses—including specific intent and identifiable injury—were not established beyond reasonable doubt by the prosecution's evidence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary of Case 631/2025 The court acquitted the two accused under IPC Sections 115(2), 351(2), 54, and DP Act Section 135(1), finding insufficient credible evidence to support the prosecution's case. The court noted that while panch witnesses turned hostile and the complainant's testimony lacked corroboration from independent witnesses, the essential ingredients of the alleged offenses—including specific intent and identifiable injury—were not established beyond reasonable doubt by the prosecution's evidence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts