Government of Gujarat vs Mahendrasinh @ Babo Gumansinh Jadeja Advocate - A H SAMA — 39/2022
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 308,323,324,504,506(2),114. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 24th April 2026.
SC - SESSIONS CASE
CNR: GJJM010019822022
Filing Number
39/2022
Filing Date
15-Jun-2022
Registration No
39/2022
Registration Date
15-Jun-2022
Court
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT JANMAGAR
Judge
1-Principal District & Sessions Judge
Decision Date
24-Apr-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL
Last updated 11-Jun-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
11202002212233
Police Station
JAMNAGAR CITY-C POLICE STATION - JAMNAGAR DISTRICT
Year
2021
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Government of Gujarat
Adv. D R TRIVEDI
Respondent(s)
-
1.Mahendrasinh @ Babo Gumansinh Jadeja Advocate - A H SAMA
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
24-Apr-2026
JudegementView PDF
-
24-Apr-2026
JudegementView PDF
Case Summary: 39/2022 Court: Sessions Court, Jamnagar Decided: April 24, 2026 The court acquitted both accused Mahendrasinh (Babo) Gumansinh Jadeja and Parth (Jabil) Jitendrabhai Kotayura of charges under IPC Sections 308, 323, 324, 504, 506(2), 114, and GP Act Section 135(1), finding that the prosecution failed to prove the allegations beyond reasonable doubt. The court held that the complainant's testimony lacked sufficient corroboration, medical evidence was inconclusive, and key details regarding the alleged incident remained unsubstantiated by credible evidence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
24-Apr-2026
Disposed
Principal District & Sessions Judge
-
10-Apr-2026
Final Arguments
Principal District & Sessions Judge
-
16-Mar-2026
Final Arguments
Principal District & Sessions Judge
-
03-Mar-2026
Final Arguments
Principal District & Sessions Judge
-
02-Mar-2026
Final Arguments
Principal District & Sessions Judge
-
24-Feb-2026
Final Arguments
Principal District & Sessions Judge
-
17-Feb-2026
Final Arguments
Principal District & Sessions Judge
-
03-Feb-2026
Further Statement
Principal District & Sessions Judge
-
08-Jan-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal District & Sessions Judge
-
19-Dec-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal District & Sessions Judge
-
11-Dec-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal District & Sessions Judge
-
03-Dec-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal District & Sessions Judge
-
07-Nov-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal District & Sessions Judge
-
06-Oct-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal District & Sessions Judge
-
16-Sep-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal District & Sessions Judge
-
20-Aug-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal District & Sessions Judge
-
02-Aug-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal District & Sessions Judge
-
20-Jun-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal District & Sessions Judge
-
29-May-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal District & Sessions Judge
-
15-May-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal District & Sessions Judge
-
04-Apr-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal District & Sessions Judge
-
04-Mar-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal District & Sessions Judge
-
12-Feb-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal District & Sessions Judge
-
07-Jan-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal District & Sessions Judge
-
06-Dec-2024
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal District & Sessions Judge
-
22-Nov-2024
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal District & Sessions Judge
-
23-Oct-2024
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal District & Sessions Judge
-
10-Sep-2024
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal District & Sessions Judge
-
10-Sep-2024
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal District & Sessions Judge
-
30-Jul-2024
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal District & Sessions Judge
-
30-Jul-2024
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal District & Sessions Judge
-
19-Jun-2024
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal District & Sessions Judge
-
23-May-2024
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal District & Sessions Judge
-
25-Apr-2024
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal District & Sessions Judge
-
25-Apr-2024
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal District & Sessions Judge
-
26-Mar-2024
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal District & Sessions Judge
-
04-Mar-2024
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal District & Sessions Judge
-
15-Feb-2024
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal District & Sessions Judge
-
23-Jan-2024
Documentary Evidence
Principal District & Sessions Judge
-
08-Jan-2024
Documentary Evidence
Principal District & Sessions Judge
-
20-Dec-2023
Documentary Evidence
Principal District & Sessions Judge
-
23-Nov-2023
Documentary Evidence
Principal District & Sessions Judge
-
25-Oct-2023
Documentary Evidence
Principal District & Sessions Judge
-
29-Sep-2023
Documentary Evidence
Principal District & Sessions Judge
-
05-Sep-2023
Documentary Evidence
Principal District & Sessions Judge
-
23-Aug-2023
Documentary Evidence
Principal District & Sessions Judge
-
21-Jul-2023
Documentary Evidence
Principal District & Sessions Judge
-
23-Jun-2023
Documentary Evidence
Principal District & Sessions Judge
-
11-May-2023
Documentary Evidence
Principal District & Sessions Judge
-
18-Mar-2023
Documentary Evidence
Principal District & Sessions Judge
-
22-Feb-2023
Documentary Evidence
Principal District & Sessions Judge
-
03-Feb-2023
Process To Accused
Principal District & Sessions Judge
-
11-Jan-2023
Process To Accused
Principal District & Sessions Judge
-
14-Dec-2022
Process To Accused
Principal District & Sessions Judge
-
23-Nov-2022
Process To Accused
Principal District & Sessions Judge
-
02-Nov-2022
Process To Accused
Principal District & Sessions Judge
-
12-Sep-2022
Process To Accused
Principal District & Sessions Judge
-
29-Jun-2022
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
15-Jun-2022
Case filed
Registration No. 39/2022
Case Summary: 39/2022 Court: Sessions Court, Jamnagar Decided: April 24, 2026 The court acquitted both accused Mahendrasinh (Babo) Gumansinh Jadeja and Parth (Jabil) Jitendrabhai Kotayura of charges under IPC Sections 308, 323, 324, 504, 506(2), 114, and GP Act Section 135(1), finding that the prosecution failed to prove the allegations beyond reasonable doubt. The court held that the complainant's testimony lacked sufficient corroboration, medical evidence was inconclusive, and key details regarding the alleged incident remained unsubstantiated by credible evidence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts