THE STATE OF GUJARAT vs VIJAYBHAI HARTANBHAI TALPADA Advocate - R D CHAUHAN — 891/2026
Case under Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Section 184,177,134. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 18th May 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJKH020011292026
e-Filing Number
26-02-2026
Filing Number
891/2026
Filing Date
27-Feb-2026
Registration No
891/2026
Registration Date
27-Feb-2026
Court
CIVIL COURT NADIAD
Judge
6-5th Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.
Decision Date
18-May-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL
Last updated 27-May-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
11204045250551
Police Station
NADIAD RURAL POLICE STATION - KHEDA DISTRICT
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.THE STATE OF GUJARAT
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
-
1.VIJAYBHAI HARTANBHAI TALPADA Advocate - R D CHAUHAN
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
18-May-2026
JudegementView PDF
Case Summary: C.C.NO.891/2026 The court acquitted defendant Vijaybhai Hartanbhai Talpada of charges under BNS 2023 sections 281, 125(a), 125(b) and MV Act sections 177, 184, finding that the prosecution failed to conclusively prove the defendant's negligent driving caused the accident. Though the defendant's vehicle was involved in a collision injuring three persons, the court noted the complainant and witnesses could not definitively establish the defendant's rash or negligent conduct, and reasonable doubt existed regarding liability. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
18-May-2026
Disposed
5th Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.
-
30-Apr-2026
Final Arguments
5th Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.
-
16-Apr-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
5th Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.
-
12-Mar-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
27-Feb-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 891/2026
Case Summary: C.C.NO.891/2026 The court acquitted defendant Vijaybhai Hartanbhai Talpada of charges under BNS 2023 sections 281, 125(a), 125(b) and MV Act sections 177, 184, finding that the prosecution failed to conclusively prove the defendant's negligent driving caused the accident. Though the defendant's vehicle was involved in a collision injuring three persons, the court noted the complainant and witnesses could not definitively establish the defendant's rash or negligent conduct, and reasonable doubt existed regarding liability. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts