Government of Gujarat vs SATISHBHAI DAAMJIBHAI NAKUM Advocate - N S MAKWANA — 160/2026
Case under The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 115(2),296(B),351(3),54. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 01st May 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJJN100002062026
Filing Number
160/2026
Filing Date
12-03-2026
Registration No
160/2026
Registration Date
12-03-2026
Court
TALUKA COURT, VANTHALI
Judge
1-ADDL. SR. CIVIL JUDGE & A.C.J.M.
Decision Date
01st May 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL
FIR Details
FIR Number
0090
Police Station
VANTHALI POLICE STATION - JUNAGADH DISTRICT
Year
2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Government of Gujarat
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
SATISHBHAI DAAMJIBHAI NAKUM Advocate - N S MAKWANA
DIPESHBHAI URFE DIPO SATISHBHAI NAKUM
Adv. N S MAKWANA
Hearing History
Judge: 1-ADDL. SR. CIVIL JUDGE & A.C.J.M.
Disposed
JUDGEMENT
PROCESS TO ACCUSED
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 01-05-2026 | Disposed |
| 09-04-2026 | JUDGEMENT |
| 12-03-2026 | PROCESS TO ACCUSED |
Final Orders / Judgements
The court acquitted both accused Satishbhai Damjibhai Nakum and Dipeshbhai Urfe Dipo Satishbhai Nakum of charges under IPC sections 114(2), 296(b), 351(3), and 54 for allegedly assaulting the complainant at a vegetable market. The court found insufficient direct evidence that the accused hurled abusive language, physically assaulted, or threatened to kill the complainant, as the complainant's own testimony lacked specifics about the alleged abuse and the incident appeared to be a common market dispute resulting from accidental pushing rather than intentional criminal conduct. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The court acquitted both accused Satishbhai Damjibhai Nakum and Dipeshbhai Urfe Dipo Satishbhai Nakum of charges under IPC sections 114(2), 296(b), 351(3), and 54 for allegedly assaulting the complainant at a vegetable market. The court found insufficient direct evidence that the accused hurled abusive language, physically assaulted, or threatened to kill the complainant, as the complainant's own testimony lacked specifics about the alleged abuse and the incident appeared to be a common market dispute resulting from accidental pushing rather than intentional criminal conduct. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts