GOVERNMENT OF GUJARAT vs SHAILESHKUMAR SHANTILAL NINAMA Advocate - T A VAHORA — 160/2023
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 279,427. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 30th April 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJKH030002222023
Filing Number
160/2023
Filing Date
28-01-2023
Registration No
160/2023
Registration Date
28-01-2023
Court
TALUKA COURT, MEHMEDABAD
Judge
1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Decision Date
30th April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
GOVERNMENT OF GUJARAT
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
SHAILESHKUMAR SHANTILAL NINAMA Advocate - T A VAHORA
Hearing History
Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Disposed
JUDGEMENT
JUDGEMENT
JUDGEMENT
JUDGEMENT
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 30-04-2026 | Disposed |
| 12-03-2026 | JUDGEMENT |
| 12-01-2026 | JUDGEMENT |
| 24-11-2025 | JUDGEMENT |
| 09-10-2025 | JUDGEMENT |
Final Orders / Judgements
CASE SUMMARY: Government of Gujarat v. Shaileshkumar Shantilal Ninama (Case 160/2023) Court's Decision The court acquitted the accused, Shaileshkumar Shantilal Ninama, of charges under IPC Sections 279 & 427 and Motor Vehicles Act Sections 177 & 184, finding that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. The court determined that circumstantial evidence and witness testimonies contained significant contradictions—including conflicting timings of the incident and failure to establish definitive rash/negligent driving—making it unsafe to convict based on available evidence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
CASE SUMMARY: Government of Gujarat v. Shaileshkumar Shantilal Ninama (Case 160/2023) Court's Decision The court acquitted the accused, Shaileshkumar Shantilal Ninama, of charges under IPC Sections 279 & 427 and Motor Vehicles Act Sections 177 & 184, finding that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. The court determined that circumstantial evidence and witness testimonies contained significant contradictions—including conflicting timings of the incident and failure to establish definitive rash/negligent driving—making it unsafe to convict based on available evidence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts