The State of Gujarat vs Malde Urfe Malo Bhupatbhai Parmar, Koli Advocate - G B SAPARA — 5/2024

Case under The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 71(1),329(4). Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 28th April 2026.

PCSO - SPECIAL CASE - PCSO

CNR: GJJN220003502024

Case disposed

Filing Number

5/2024

Filing Date

04-11-2024

Registration No

5/2024

Registration Date

04-11-2024

Court

Additional Court, Vanthali

Judge

1-3rd ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE

Decision Date

28th April 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL

FIR Details

FIR Number

11203068240501

Police Station

VANTHALI POLICE STATION - JUNAGADH DISTRICT

Year

2024

Acts & Sections

The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 71(1),329(4)
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 Section 12

Petitioner(s)

The State of Gujarat

Adv. AGP

Respondent(s)

Malde Urfe Malo Bhupatbhai Parmar, Koli Advocate - G B SAPARA

Hearing History

Judge: 1-3rd ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE

28-04-2026

Disposed

15-04-2026

FINAL ARGUMENTS

09-04-2026

FINAL ARGUMENTS

08-04-2026

FURTHER STATEMENT

01-04-2026

EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION

Final Orders / Judgements

28-04-2026
JUDEGEMENT

Court Decision Summary The court acquitted the accused (Malakh Bhupat Parmar) of charges under IPC Sections 71(1), 328(4), and POCSO Act Section 12, finding that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. While the victim's testimony and medical evidence suggested a sexual assault incident occurred on September 15, 2024, significant inconsistencies and gaps in the evidence—including lack of corroboration, missing details about the alleged perpetrator's identity, and contradictions between different witness statements—created reasonable doubt about the accused's guilt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Court Decision Summary The court acquitted the accused (Malakh Bhupat Parmar) of charges under IPC Sections 71(1), 328(4), and POCSO Act Section 12, finding that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. While the victim's testimony and medical evidence suggested a sexual assault incident occurred on September 15, 2024, significant inconsistencies and gaps in the evidence—including lack of corroboration, missing details about the alleged perpetrator's identity, and contradictions between different witness statements—created reasonable doubt about the accused's guilt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

Additional Court, Vanthali All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case