Government of Gujarat vs SHAILESHSINH MANGALSINH ZALA Advocate - M K KHATRI — 1282/2024
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 279,337,338,. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 16th March 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJGN030020332024
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
1282/2024
Filing Date
02-12-2024
Registration No
1282/2024
Registration Date
02-12-2024
Court
TALUKA COURT, DEHGAM
Judge
2-ADDI CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Decision Date
16th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL
FIR Details
FIR Number
11216012240152
Police Station
RAKHIYAL POLICE STATION - GANDHINAGAR DISTRICT
Year
2024
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Government of Gujarat
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
SHAILESHSINH MANGALSINH ZALA Advocate - M K KHATRI
Hearing History
Judge: 2-ADDI CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Disposed
JUDGEMENT
JUDGEMENT
JUDGEMENT
FURTHER STATEMENT
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 16-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 09-03-2026 | JUDGEMENT | |
| 28-02-2026 | JUDGEMENT | |
| 17-02-2026 | JUDGEMENT | |
| 10-02-2026 | FURTHER STATEMENT |
Final Orders / Judgements
Court Judgment Summary Case: C.C.No. 1282 of 2024, Dahegam Judicial Magistrate Court (Gujarat) Decision: The court acquitted the accused, Shailendrasinh Mangalsinh Jhala, under IPC Sections 279, 337, 338 and Motor Vehicles Act Sections 177, 183, 184, 187, 181(3). The prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused recklessly drove his motorcycle and caused an accident injuring the complainant's daughter. Key Reason: Witness testimonies were inconsistent and unreliable—the complainant did not witness the accident, and other witnesses contradicted the prosecution narrative regarding vehicle identification and accident circumstances, creating insufficient grounds for conviction. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Court Judgment Summary Case: C.C.No. 1282 of 2024, Dahegam Judicial Magistrate Court (Gujarat) Decision: The court acquitted the accused, Shailendrasinh Mangalsinh Jhala, under IPC Sections 279, 337, 338 and Motor Vehicles Act Sections 177, 183, 184, 187, 181(3). The prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused recklessly drove his motorcycle and caused an accident injuring the complainant's daughter. Key Reason: Witness testimonies were inconsistent and unreliable—the complainant did not witness the accident, and other witnesses contradicted the prosecution narrative regarding vehicle identification and accident circumstances, creating insufficient grounds for conviction. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts