Government of Gujarat vs Jahangir Aminbhai Shekh Advocate - R D THAKKAR — 511/2019
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 394,365,387,394,354,323,506,114,. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 06th March 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJJN020006472019
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
511/2019
Filing Date
06-02-2019
Registration No
511/2019
Registration Date
06-02-2019
Court
CIVIL COURT JUNAGADH
Judge
2-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDL. CJM
Decision Date
06th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Government of Gujarat
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
Jahangir Aminbhai Shekh Advocate - R D THAKKAR
Shahrukhkhan Husenkhan Turk
Adv. R D THAKKAR
Hearing History
Judge: 2-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDL. CJM
Disposed
JUDGEMENT
FINAL ARGUMENTS
FINAL ARGUMENTS
FINAL ARGUMENTS
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 06-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 26-02-2026 | JUDGEMENT | |
| 12-02-2026 | FINAL ARGUMENTS | |
| 31-01-2026 | FINAL ARGUMENTS | |
| 08-01-2026 | FINAL ARGUMENTS |
Final Orders / Judgements
SUMMARY The court acquitted both accused (Jahangir Aminbhai Shaikh and Shahrukh Khan) of charges under IPC Sections 394, 365, 387, 324, 323, 506(2), and 114, and Gujarat Police Act Section 139, as the prosecution failed to prove the allegations beyond reasonable doubt. The court found significant contradictions between the complainant's testimony and supporting witnesses, lack of corroborating evidence regarding key facts (such as the alleged looting of ₹2,000 or extortion threats), and failure to establish the requisite criminal intent and threats necessary to sustain the criminal charges. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
SUMMARY The court acquitted both accused (Jahangir Aminbhai Shaikh and Shahrukh Khan) of charges under IPC Sections 394, 365, 387, 324, 323, 506(2), and 114, and Gujarat Police Act Section 139, as the prosecution failed to prove the allegations beyond reasonable doubt. The court found significant contradictions between the complainant's testimony and supporting witnesses, lack of corroborating evidence regarding key facts (such as the alleged looting of ₹2,000 or extortion threats), and failure to establish the requisite criminal intent and threats necessary to sustain the criminal charges. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts