PARMAR VANAVIRSINH PARABATSINH vs PISTI BILAMORIYA JOSAL SEMOLBHAI Advocate - C M PATEL — 15/2013
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 279. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 30th March 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJMH060001262013
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
15/2013
Filing Date
24-11-2012
Registration No
15/2013
Registration Date
24-11-2013
Court
TALUKA COURT, VISNAGAR
Judge
3-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDL. CJM
Decision Date
30th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL
FIR Details
FIR Number
296
Police Station
VISNAGAR POLICE STATION- MEHSANA DISTRICT
Year
2012
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
PARMAR VANAVIRSINH PARABATSINH
Adv. a
Respondent(s)
PISTI BILAMORIYA JOSAL SEMOLBHAI Advocate - C M PATEL
Hearing History
Judge: 3-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDL. CJM
Disposed
FINAL ARGUMENTS
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 30-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 10-03-2026 | FINAL ARGUMENTS | |
| 09-03-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION | |
| 17-02-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION | |
| 08-01-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The Chief Judicial Magistrate of Visnagar acquitted the accused in a motor vehicle negligence case, finding that the prosecution failed to establish the essential element of recklessness required under IPC Section 279. While the complainant suffered injuries from a truck-motorcycle collision on 23 November 2012, key prosecution witnesses (including the site inspection witnesses) provided no credible evidence that the truck was being driven rashly or negligently, and the complainant's own testimony did not establish the accused's culpability beyond reasonable doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The Chief Judicial Magistrate of Visnagar acquitted the accused in a motor vehicle negligence case, finding that the prosecution failed to establish the essential element of recklessness required under IPC Section 279. While the complainant suffered injuries from a truck-motorcycle collision on 23 November 2012, key prosecution witnesses (including the site inspection witnesses) provided no credible evidence that the truck was being driven rashly or negligently, and the complainant's own testimony did not establish the accused's culpability beyond reasonable doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts