Government of Gujarat vs LAKHAMANBHAI MERAMANBHAI PARMAR Advocate - R K DAKI — 570/2021
Case under Gujarat (Bombay) Prevention of Gambling Act, 1887 Section 4,5. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 06th April 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJJN070006822021
Filing Number
570/2021
Filing Date
26-Feb-2021
Registration No
570/2021
Registration Date
26-Feb-2021
Court
TALUKA COURT, MANGROL
Judge
1-Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
Decision Date
06-Apr-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL
Last updated 21-May-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
11203055200631
Police Station
SHIL POLICE STATION - JUNAGADH DISTRICT
Year
2020
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Government of Gujarat
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
-
1.LAKHAMANBHAI MERAMANBHAI PARMAR Advocate - R K DAKI
-
2.NATHABHAI MANGABHAI CHUDASMA
Adv. I N PARMAR
-
3.RAMESHBHAI CHHAGANBHAI VAJA
Adv. I N PARMAR
-
4.HARSUKHBHAI MEPABHAI PARMAR
-
5.MAGANBHAI HIRABHAI BHARDA
Adv. I N PARMAR
-
6.RAMJIBHAI MANGABHAI BHARDA
Adv. I N PARMAR
-
7.DIPAKBHAI HARILAL NANDORIYA
Adv. I N PARMAR
-
8.SAKIBKHSHA @ SAKIBSHA HUSENKHA BELIM
-
9.SANJAYBHAI NARANBHAI NANDANIYA
-
10.DIPEN ASHIVNBHAI RANIGA
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
06-Apr-2026
JudegementView PDF
Case Summary Criminal Case No. 570/2021 (Judgment dated 06/04/2026) The court acquitted all 10 accused persons of gambling charges under the Gambling Act, finding the prosecution's case unproven. The judge held that while police witnesses testified about raiding an illegal online gambling operation and seizing cash and gambling equipment, the independent witnesses (panchas) failed to corroborate the allegations, and critical procedural irregularities undermined the prosecution's credibility. Applying the principle that benefit of doubt must favor the accused when the prosecution fails to prove its case beyond reasonable suspicion, the court ordered all accused to be acquitted and released. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
06-Apr-2026
Disposed
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
18-Mar-2026
Final Arguments
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
11-Mar-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
20-Jan-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
28-Nov-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
08-Oct-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
09-Sep-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
05-Aug-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
21-Jun-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
05-May-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal CIVIL Judge
-
17-Mar-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal CIVIL Judge
-
29-Jan-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal CIVIL Judge
-
16-Dec-2024
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal CIVIL Judge
-
18-Sep-2024
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal CIVIL Judge
-
18-Jun-2024
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal CIVIL Judge
-
18-Mar-2024
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal CIVIL Judge
-
08-Jan-2024
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal CIVIL Judge
-
13-Oct-2023
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal CIVIL Judge
-
13-Sep-2023
Plea
Principal CIVIL Judge
-
17-Jul-2023
Warrant Of Arrest
Principal CIVIL Judge
-
01-May-2023
Warrant Of Arrest
Principal CIVIL Judge
-
27-Feb-2023
Process To Accused
Principal CIVIL Judge
-
14-Dec-2022
Process To Accused
Principal CIVIL Judge
-
08-Nov-2022
Process To Accused
Principal CIVIL Judge
-
25-Aug-2022
Process To Accused
Principal CIVIL Judge
-
05-Jul-2022
Process To Accused
Principal CIVIL Judge
-
24-May-2022
Process To Accused
Principal CIVIL Judge
-
22-Mar-2022
Process To Accused
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
24-Dec-2021
Process To Accused
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
27-Sep-2021
Process To Accused
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
07-Jul-2021
Process To Accused
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
09-Apr-2021
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
26-Feb-2021
Case filed
Registration No. 570/2021
Case Summary Criminal Case No. 570/2021 (Judgment dated 06/04/2026) The court acquitted all 10 accused persons of gambling charges under the Gambling Act, finding the prosecution's case unproven. The judge held that while police witnesses testified about raiding an illegal online gambling operation and seizing cash and gambling equipment, the independent witnesses (panchas) failed to corroborate the allegations, and critical procedural irregularities undermined the prosecution's credibility. Applying the principle that benefit of doubt must favor the accused when the prosecution fails to prove its case beyond reasonable suspicion, the court ordered all accused to be acquitted and released. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts