Government of Gujarat vs BHALABHAI @ BHALIYO FULABHAI JEHABHAI TALPADA Advocate - H C DHARIYA — 571/2024
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 454,457,380,114. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 18th April 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJKH090008812024
Filing Number
571/2024
Filing Date
10-Oct-2024
Registration No
571/2024
Registration Date
10-Oct-2024
Court
TALUKA COURT, MAHUDHA
Judge
1-Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
Decision Date
18-Apr-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL
Last updated 23-Apr-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
11204039240270
Police Station
MAHUDHA POLICE STATION - KHEDA DISTRICT
Year
2024
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Government of Gujarat
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
-
1.BHALABHAI @ BHALIYO FULABHAI JEHABHAI TALPADA Advocate - H C DHARIYA
-
2.MANUBHAI CHHAGANBHAI @ VAGHAJIBHAI PARMAR
Adv. N J PANDYA
-
3.VIKRAMBHAI @ KALABHAI VAGHAJIBHAI MAHERAMBHAI BHARWAD
Adv. N J PANDYA
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
18-Apr-2026
JudegementView PDF
Summary The Judicial Magistrate First Class court in Mujhada acquitted all three accused (Bhalabhai, Manubhai, and Vikrambhai) of theft charges under IPC Sections 454, 457, 380, and 114 due to insufficient evidence. The court found that while the complainant testified about the theft of 110 bundles of tobacco worth approximately ₹1,20,000 from his godown, the prosecution failed to establish direct or circumstantial proof linking the accused to the crime, particularly noting inconsistencies in the panch (witness) testimony and lack of credible recovery evidence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
18-Apr-2026
Disposed
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
08-Apr-2026
Final Arguments
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
03-Apr-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
01-Apr-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
09-Mar-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
23-Feb-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
10-Feb-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
29-Jan-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
06-Jan-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
24-Dec-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
02-Dec-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
13-Nov-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
17-Oct-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
03-Oct-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
20-Sep-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
08-Sep-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
26-Aug-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
12-Aug-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
29-Jul-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
16-Jul-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
03-Jul-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
27-May-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
15-Apr-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
17-Feb-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
28-Jan-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
01-Jan-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
21-Dec-2024
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
27-Nov-2024
Process To Accused
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
07-Nov-2024
Process To Accused
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
10-Oct-2024
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
10-Oct-2024
Case filed
Registration No. 571/2024
Summary The Judicial Magistrate First Class court in Mujhada acquitted all three accused (Bhalabhai, Manubhai, and Vikrambhai) of theft charges under IPC Sections 454, 457, 380, and 114 due to insufficient evidence. The court found that while the complainant testified about the theft of 110 bundles of tobacco worth approximately ₹1,20,000 from his godown, the prosecution failed to establish direct or circumstantial proof linking the accused to the crime, particularly noting inconsistencies in the panch (witness) testimony and lack of credible recovery evidence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts