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

Case disposed

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

GUJARAT (BOMBAY) POLICE ACT, 1951 Section 135(1)

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

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

09-03-2026
JUDEGEMENT

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.

casestatus.in Summary

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

More from this court

TALUKA COURT, SATLASANA All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case