GOVERNMENT OF GUJARAT THE STATE vs SHIVLAL NATHULAL GADRI — 1003/2026

Case under The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 285. Disposed: Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY on 11th July 2026.

Case disposed

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJKT030014092026

Filing Number

1003/2026

Filing Date

21-Apr-2026

Registration No

1003/2026

Registration Date

21-Apr-2026

Court

TALUKA COURT, MUNDRA

Judge

3-Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

Decision Date

11-Jul-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY

Last updated 18-Jul-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

358

Police Station

MUNDRA POLICE STATION - KACHCHH DISTRICT

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 285

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.GOVERNMENT OF GUJARAT THE STATE

    Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.SHIVLAL NATHULAL GADRI

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 11-Jul-2026

    Order

    Case Summary: 1003/2026 The court convicted respondent Shivlal Nathulal Gadri under IPC Section 285 (a bailable offense) after he voluntarily confessed to the crime. Considering the accused's poverty, family circumstances, lack of prior convictions, and applying reformative theory of punishment, the court found that justice could be served without imposing minimum or maximum punishment. Judgment: The accused was acquitted on technicality grounds, but ordered to pay a fine of ₹500 (alternatively 7 days simple imprisonment if fine unpaid). The bail bond from trial proceedings was ordered to remain valid. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 11-Jul-2026

    Disposed

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  4. 18-Jun-2026

    Order

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  5. 26-May-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 21-Apr-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 1003/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: 1003/2026 The court convicted respondent Shivlal Nathulal Gadri under IPC Section 285 (a bailable offense) after he voluntarily confessed to the crime. Considering the accused's poverty, family circumstances, lack of prior convictions, and applying reformative theory of punishment, the court found that justice could be served without imposing minimum or maximum punishment. Judgment: The accused was acquitted on technicality grounds, but ordered to pay a fine of ₹500 (alternatively 7 days simple imprisonment if fine unpaid). The bail bond from trial proceedings was ordered to remain valid. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case