State of Gujarat vs VIJAYBHAI SARMANBHAI VADHER Advocate - H N VALA — 45/2025
Case under Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 Section 11(D),(E),(F),(H),. Disposed: Contested--JUDGEMENT on 02nd April 2026.
SC - SESSIONS CASE
CNR: GJGS010013382025
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
45/2025
Filing Date
29-10-2025
Registration No
45/2025
Registration Date
29-10-2025
Court
District Court, Veraval
Judge
1-PRINCIPAL DISTRICT JUDGE
Decision Date
02nd April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGEMENT
FIR Details
FIR Number
3012
Police Station
SOMNATH MARINE POLICE STATION - GIR SOMNATH DISTRICT
Year
2018
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State of Gujarat
Adv. J D PATHAK
Respondent(s)
VIJAYBHAI SARMANBHAI VADHER Advocate - H N VALA
SURAJBHAI DHIRUBHAI PARMAR
Adv. H N VALA
HARESHBHAI DHIRUBHAI PARMAR
Adv. H N VALA
Hearing History
Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL DISTRICT JUDGE
Disposed
FINAL ARGUMENTS
FINAL ARGUMENTS
FINAL ARGUMENTS
FINAL ARGUMENTS
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 02-04-2026 | Disposed | |
| 09-03-2026 | FINAL ARGUMENTS | |
| 02-03-2026 | FINAL ARGUMENTS | |
| 21-02-2026 | FINAL ARGUMENTS | |
| 28-01-2026 | FINAL ARGUMENTS |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The Sessions Court of Gir-Somnath acquitted all three accused persons of charges under the Gujarat Animal Preservation Act and Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, finding that the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused were transporting two calves with intent to slaughter them illegally. The court held that critical witnesses (panch witnesses and independent witnesses) did not support the prosecution case, no veterinary evidence of cruelty was produced, and no proof of vehicle ownership or slaughter intent was established, thereby extending the benefit of doubt to the accused under Section 235(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The Sessions Court of Gir-Somnath acquitted all three accused persons of charges under the Gujarat Animal Preservation Act and Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, finding that the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused were transporting two calves with intent to slaughter them illegally. The court held that critical witnesses (panch witnesses and independent witnesses) did not support the prosecution case, no veterinary evidence of cruelty was produced, and no proof of vehicle ownership or slaughter intent was established, thereby extending the benefit of doubt to the accused under Section 235(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts