THE STATE OF GUJARAT vs ISHVAR KARSHANBHAI VARCHAND Advocate - S D GADHVI — 478/2025

Case under The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 281,106(1). Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 15th June 2026.

Case disposed

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJKT100010072025

Filing Number

478/2025

Filing Date

26-Mar-2025

Registration No

478/2025

Registration Date

26-Mar-2025

Court

TALUKA COURT, ANJAR

Judge

1-Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

Decision Date

15-Jun-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL

Last updated 18-Jul-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

11993003241067

Police Station

ANJAR POLICE STATION - KACHCHH DISTRICT

Year

2024

Acts & Sections

The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 281,106(1)
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Section 177,184,134

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.THE STATE OF GUJARAT

    Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.ISHVAR KARSHANBHAI VARCHAND Advocate - S D GADHVI

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 15-Jun-2026

    JudegementView PDF

    Case Summary: Criminal Case 478/2025 Court Decision: The accused, Ishvar Karshanbhai Varchand, was acquitted of all charges under IPC Sections 281, 106(1) and Motor Vehicles Act Sections 177, 184, 134. Key Reasoning: The court found that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. The complainant and witness testimonies were contradictory and lacked corroborating evidence—witnesses admitted they did not directly witness the accident, had incomplete information about vehicle details, and the inquest panchnamas appeared pre-prepared without proper procedure. The court concluded the prosecution could not establish that the accused recklessly drove his vehicle and caused the fatal accident as alleged. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 15-Jun-2026

    Disposed

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  4. 09-Jun-2026

    Judgement

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  5. 08-Jun-2026

    Final Arguments

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  6. 01-Jun-2026

    Further Statement

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  7. 26-May-2026

    Further Statement

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  8. 29-Apr-2026

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  9. 17-Apr-2026

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  10. 09-Apr-2026

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  11. 25-Mar-2026

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  12. 02-Mar-2026

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  13. 05-Jan-2026

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  14. 17-Dec-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  15. 03-Dec-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  16. 18-Nov-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  17. 04-Nov-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  18. 15-Oct-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  19. 17-Sep-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  20. 25-Aug-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  21. 28-Jul-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  22. 14-Jul-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  23. 30-Jun-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  24. 13-May-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  25. 26-Mar-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. 478/2025

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: Criminal Case 478/2025 Court Decision: The accused, Ishvar Karshanbhai Varchand, was acquitted of all charges under IPC Sections 281, 106(1) and Motor Vehicles Act Sections 177, 184, 134. Key Reasoning: The court found that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. The complainant and witness testimonies were contradictory and lacked corroborating evidence—witnesses admitted they did not directly witness the accident, had incomplete information about vehicle details, and the inquest panchnamas appeared pre-prepared without proper procedure. The court concluded the prosecution could not establish that the accused recklessly drove his vehicle and caused the fatal accident as alleged. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case