GOVERNMENT OF GUJARAT vs KAMLESH RAJENDRA JOSHI Advocate - R G JAYPAL — 1572/2024

Case under Public Gambling Act, 1867 [Section 1 18] Section 12. Disposed: Contested--JUDGEMENT on 23rd March 2026.

Case disposed

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJKT070019802024

Filing Number

1572/2024

Filing Date

22-Nov-2024

Registration No

1572/2024

Registration Date

22-Nov-2024

Court

TALUKA COURT, NAKHATRANA

Judge

4-Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

Decision Date

23-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--JUDGEMENT

Last updated 21-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

1221

Police Station

NAKHATRANA POLICE STATION - KACHCHH DISTRICT

Year

2022

Acts & Sections

Public Gambling Act, 1867 [Section 1 18] Section 12

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.GOVERNMENT OF GUJARAT

    Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.KAMLESH RAJENDRA JOSHI Advocate - R G JAYPAL

  2. 2.MAHENDRA KAYA BUCHIYA

  3. 3.MEHULNATH DAYANATH GOSWAMI

  4. 4.NANJEE KAYA BUCHIYA

  5. 5.ADHREMAN HUSEN NODE

  6. 6.ISMAIL ADHREMAN KUMBHAR

  7. 7.ALPESH VINOD VALAND

  8. 8.DHANGAR DAMGAR GOSWAMI

  9. 9.PETHUBHA HARBHAMJEE JADEJA

  10. 10.RATILAL @ RATO KANJEE PAYAN

  11. 11.GULAM ABDULLA NODE

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 23-Mar-2026

    JudegementView PDF

    Summary The Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nakhatrana-Kutch acquitted two defendants (Mehendra Kaya Buchiya and Naanji Kaya Buchiya) charged under the Gambling Act, Section 12, finding that the prosecution failed to conclusively prove the gambling charges beyond reasonable doubt. While the court acknowledged evidence of seized cash and mobile phones totaling ₹1,66,500, it determined that the corroborating witness testimony from panchas (independent witnesses) was insufficient to establish the case, as the panchas did not substantively support the prosecution's narrative. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 23-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  4. 17-Mar-2026

    Further Statement

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  5. 11-Mar-2026

    Further Statement

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  6. 25-Feb-2026

    Further Statement

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  7. 23-Feb-2026

    Summons - Notice

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  8. 03-Feb-2026

    Summons - Notice

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  9. 20-Jan-2026

    Summons - Notice

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  10. 15-Dec-2025

    Summons - Notice

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  11. 10-Nov-2025

    Summons - Notice

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  12. 08-Oct-2025

    Summons - Notice

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  13. 23-Sep-2025

    Summons - Notice

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  14. 19-Aug-2025

    Summons - Notice

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  15. 29-Jul-2025

    Summons - Notice

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  16. 09-Jul-2025

    Summons - Notice

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  17. 04-Jun-2025

    Summons - Notice

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  18. 04-Jun-2025

    Summons - Notice

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  19. 01-May-2025

    Summons - Notice

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  20. 24-Mar-2025

    Summons - Notice

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  21. 08-Mar-2025

    Summons - Notice

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  22. 06-Feb-2025

    Summons - Notice

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  23. 14-Dec-2024

    Summons - Notice

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  24. 22-Nov-2024

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  25. 22-Nov-2024

    Case filed

    Registration No. 1572/2024

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nakhatrana-Kutch acquitted two defendants (Mehendra Kaya Buchiya and Naanji Kaya Buchiya) charged under the Gambling Act, Section 12, finding that the prosecution failed to conclusively prove the gambling charges beyond reasonable doubt. While the court acknowledged evidence of seized cash and mobile phones totaling ₹1,66,500, it determined that the corroborating witness testimony from panchas (independent witnesses) was insufficient to establish the case, as the panchas did not substantively support the prosecution's narrative. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case