Government of Gujarat vs ARVINDBHAI MANGALBHAI CHAUHAN Advocate - M A PATHAN — 197/2024
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 325,504,506(2). Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 28th April 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJKH040002942024
Filing Number
197/2024
Filing Date
19-03-2024
Registration No
197/2024
Registration Date
19-03-2024
Court
TALUKA COURT, MATAR
Judge
1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Decision Date
28th April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL
FIR Details
FIR Number
11204040230339
Police Station
MATAR POLICE STATION - KHEDA DISTRICT
Year
2023
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Government of Gujarat
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
ARVINDBHAI MANGALBHAI CHAUHAN Advocate - M A PATHAN
Hearing History
Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Disposed
FURTHER STATEMENT
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 28-04-2026 | Disposed |
| 22-04-2026 | FURTHER STATEMENT |
| 01-04-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION |
| 16-03-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION |
| 03-03-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: CC No. 197/2024 Court Decision: The accused, Arvindbhai Mangalbhai Chauhan, was acquitted of charges under IPC Sections 325, 504, 506(2), and GP Act Section 135 due to insufficient credible evidence. The prosecution failed to prove the allegations beyond reasonable doubt. Key Reasoning: The court found that witness testimonies did not establish the alleged assault or threats. Evidence lacked corroboration regarding specific threats made or injuries caused, and the court noted deficiencies in the police investigation supporting the case. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: CC No. 197/2024 Court Decision: The accused, Arvindbhai Mangalbhai Chauhan, was acquitted of charges under IPC Sections 325, 504, 506(2), and GP Act Section 135 due to insufficient credible evidence. The prosecution failed to prove the allegations beyond reasonable doubt. Key Reasoning: The court found that witness testimonies did not establish the alleged assault or threats. Evidence lacked corroboration regarding specific threats made or injuries caused, and the court noted deficiencies in the police investigation supporting the case. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts