THE STATE OF GUJARAT vs THAKOR MALAJI S/O VIHAJI PRAHLADJI Advocate - J L THAKOR — 73/2025
Case under The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 137(2),87,64(2)(M),. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 01st April 2026.
PCSO - SPECIAL CASE - PCSO
CNR: GJMH010040472025
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
73/2025
Filing Date
16-12-2025
Registration No
73/2025
Registration Date
16-12-2025
Court
DISTRICT COURT MAHESANA
Judge
5-4th ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE
Decision Date
01st April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL
FIR Details
FIR Number
11206005250462
Police Station
BAVLU POLICE STATION- MEHSANA DISTRICT
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
THE STATE OF GUJARAT
Adv. R K JOSHI
Respondent(s)
THAKOR MALAJI S/O VIHAJI PRAHLADJI Advocate - J L THAKOR
Hearing History
Judge: 5-4th ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE
Disposed
JUDGEMENT
FURTHER STATEMENT
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 01-04-2026 | Disposed | |
| 17-03-2026 | JUDGEMENT | |
| 16-03-2026 | FURTHER STATEMENT | |
| 12-03-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION | |
| 10-03-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION |
Final Orders / Judgements
SUMMARY: The court acquitted the accused in this POCSO Act case. The Special POCSO Court found that the prosecution failed to prove the charges of kidnapping (BNS 137(2)), wrongful confinement (BNS 87), and aggravated sexual assault (BNS 64(2)(M)) and related POCSO offenses against the accused beyond reasonable doubt. The court noted that while the victim's testimony is important in sexual abuse cases, it must be credible, consistent, and corroborated by medical and circumstantial evidence. Here, the victim's account lacked sufficient evidentiary support, there were no visible injuries, and the victim's own testimony contradicted the prosecution's narrative of kidnapping and prolonged confinement. Consequently, the accused was acquitted of all charges. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
SUMMARY: The court acquitted the accused in this POCSO Act case. The Special POCSO Court found that the prosecution failed to prove the charges of kidnapping (BNS 137(2)), wrongful confinement (BNS 87), and aggravated sexual assault (BNS 64(2)(M)) and related POCSO offenses against the accused beyond reasonable doubt. The court noted that while the victim's testimony is important in sexual abuse cases, it must be credible, consistent, and corroborated by medical and circumstantial evidence. Here, the victim's account lacked sufficient evidentiary support, there were no visible injuries, and the victim's own testimony contradicted the prosecution's narrative of kidnapping and prolonged confinement. Consequently, the accused was acquitted of all charges. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts