Government of Gujarat vs VIPUL KANABHAI BAVA Advocate - D S UKANI — 24/2023
Case under Mines and Minerals (development and Regulation) Act, 1957 Section 4(1),4(1)(A),21. Disposed: Contested--JUDGEMENT on 25th March 2026.
SC - SESSIONS CASE
CNR: GJKT010009652023
Filing Number
24/2023
Filing Date
16-02-2023
Registration No
24/2023
Registration Date
16-02-2023
Court
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT BHUJ
Judge
29-7th ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE
Decision Date
25th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGEMENT
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Government of Gujarat
Adv. D J THACKER
Respondent(s)
VIPUL KANABHAI BAVA Advocate - D S UKANI
BABUBHAI NARANBHAI AHIR
Adv. D S UKANI
Hearing History
Judge: 29-7th ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE
Disposed
FINAL ARGUMENTS
FURTHER STATEMENT
FURTHER STATEMENT
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 25-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 11-03-2026 | FINAL ARGUMENTS |
| 03-03-2026 | FURTHER STATEMENT |
| 20-02-2026 | FURTHER STATEMENT |
| 19-02-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary The 7th Additional Sessions Court in Bhuj, Gujarat acquitted both defendants (Vipulbhai Kanabahai Bava and Babubahai Naranbahai Ahir) of charges under the Indian Penal Code and Mines and Minerals Act, finding insufficient evidence to prove the alleged illegal transportation of black traprock mineral. The court noted critical procedural lapses by the prosecution, including failure to identify independent witnesses, lack of proper documentation at the seizure site, delayed FIR filing (19 days after the incident), and absence of corroborating evidence linking the accused to the crimes. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary The 7th Additional Sessions Court in Bhuj, Gujarat acquitted both defendants (Vipulbhai Kanabahai Bava and Babubahai Naranbahai Ahir) of charges under the Indian Penal Code and Mines and Minerals Act, finding insufficient evidence to prove the alleged illegal transportation of black traprock mineral. The court noted critical procedural lapses by the prosecution, including failure to identify independent witnesses, lack of proper documentation at the seizure site, delayed FIR filing (19 days after the incident), and absence of corroborating evidence linking the accused to the crimes. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts