Government of Gujarat vs CHAUHAN JASHPALSINH DIPSINH BHUPATSINH Advocate - S G CHAUHAN — 212/2025
Case under Gujarat (bombay) Police Act, 1951 Section 135(1). Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 09th March 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJMH110003022025
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
212/2025
Filing Date
10-06-2025
Registration No
212/2025
Registration Date
10-06-2025
Court
TALUKA COURT, SATLASANA
Judge
1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Decision Date
09th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL
FIR Details
FIR Number
11206062250098
Police Station
SATLASANA POLICE STATION- MEHSANA DISTRICT
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Government of Gujarat
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
CHAUHAN JASHPALSINH DIPSINH BHUPATSINH Advocate - S G CHAUHAN
Hearing History
Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Disposed
JUDGEMENT
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 09-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 23-02-2026 | JUDGEMENT | |
| 19-01-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION | |
| 19-12-2025 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION | |
| 15-12-2025 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The court acquitted the accused Yojhan Jaspalsingh Dipsingh Bhuptsing on charges under IPC Section 135(1) (unauthorized possession of firearms without permit). The court found that while the prosecution presented circumstantial evidence, the five witnesses (police constables) who testified lacked credibility—their statements contradicted each other, contained material gaps, and appeared unreliable. The court concluded the prosecution failed to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and the accused's denial of the charges, combined with deficiencies in the prosecution's evidence, warranted acquittal under Section 278(1) IPC. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The court acquitted the accused Yojhan Jaspalsingh Dipsingh Bhuptsing on charges under IPC Section 135(1) (unauthorized possession of firearms without permit). The court found that while the prosecution presented circumstantial evidence, the five witnesses (police constables) who testified lacked credibility—their statements contradicted each other, contained material gaps, and appeared unreliable. The court concluded the prosecution failed to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and the accused's denial of the charges, combined with deficiencies in the prosecution's evidence, warranted acquittal under Section 278(1) IPC. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts