Government of Gujarat vs PRADIPSINH GAMBHIRSINH SODHA Advocate - M D GADHAVI — 494/2025

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 506,294(B). Disposed: Contested--JUDGEMENT on 07th May 2026.

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJKT080005842025

Case disposed

Filing Number

494/2025

Filing Date

12-03-2025

Registration No

494/2025

Registration Date

12-03-2025

Court

TALUKA COURT, RAPAR

Judge

2-ADDI CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C

Decision Date

07th May 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--JUDGEMENT

FIR Details

FIR Number

11993010240247

Police Station

RAHPAR POLICE STATION - KACHCHH DISTRICT

Year

2024

Acts & Sections

INDIAN PENAL CODE Section 506,294(B)
GUJARAT MONEY LANDERS ACT, 2011 Section 5,33(3),42(D),47

Petitioner(s)

Government of Gujarat

Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

PRADIPSINH GAMBHIRSINH SODHA Advocate - M D GADHAVI

Hearing History

Judge: 2-ADDI CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C

07-05-2026

Disposed

05-05-2026

JUDGEMENT

09-04-2026

JUDGEMENT

11-03-2026

EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION

25-02-2026

EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION

Final Orders / Judgements

07-05-2026
JUDEGEMENT

Summary The Additional Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate First Class court in Rapar, Kutch acquitted the accused Pradipsinh Gambhirsinh Sodha of charges under IPC Sections 294(b), 506(2), and the Gujarat Money Lending Regulation Act Sections 5, 33(3), 42(d), and 47. The court found that the complainant's own testimony and cross-examination failed to establish the alleged offenses beyond reasonable doubt, as he admitted the accused did not demand extra interest or engage in harassment. Consequently, the accused was acquitted under CrPC Section 248(1), benefiting from the principle that doubt favors the accused. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The Additional Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate First Class court in Rapar, Kutch acquitted the accused Pradipsinh Gambhirsinh Sodha of charges under IPC Sections 294(b), 506(2), and the Gujarat Money Lending Regulation Act Sections 5, 33(3), 42(d), and 47. The court found that the complainant's own testimony and cross-examination failed to establish the alleged offenses beyond reasonable doubt, as he admitted the accused did not demand extra interest or engage in harassment. Consequently, the accused was acquitted under CrPC Section 248(1), benefiting from the principle that doubt favors the accused. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

TALUKA COURT, RAPAR All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case