GOVERNMENT OF GUJARAT vs PARMAR SANJAYBHAI MOHANBHAI — 2632/2024

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 457,380,114,. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 03rd April 2026.

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJMH120033732024

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

2632/2024

Filing Date

19-12-2024

Registration No

2632/2024

Registration Date

19-12-2024

Court

TALUKA COURT, UNJHA

Judge

1-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDL. CJM

Decision Date

03rd April 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL

FIR Details

FIR Number

11206033240167

Police Station

UNJHA POLICE STATION - MEHSANA DISTRICT

Year

2021

Acts & Sections

INDIAN PENAL CODE Section 457,380,114,

Petitioner(s)

GOVERNMENT OF GUJARAT

Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

PARMAR SANJAYBHAI MOHANBHAI

Hearing History

Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDL. CJM

03-04-2026

Disposed

10-03-2026

JUDGEMENT

27-02-2026

JUDGEMENT

11-02-2026

EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION

27-01-2026

PROCESS TO ACCUSED

Final Orders / Judgements

03-04-2026
JUDEGEMENT

Summary The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court in Unjha acquitted the accused Sanjaybhai under the Indian Penal Code sections 457, 380, and 114 (housebreaking, theft, and abetment) in a criminal case involving an alleged burglary where jewelry and cash worth ₹80,500 were reportedly stolen. The court found that while the complainant's witness testimony established a burglary occurred, the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the specific accused committed the theft, as no direct evidence linked the accused to the crime. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court in Unjha acquitted the accused Sanjaybhai under the Indian Penal Code sections 457, 380, and 114 (housebreaking, theft, and abetment) in a criminal case involving an alleged burglary where jewelry and cash worth ₹80,500 were reportedly stolen. The court found that while the complainant's witness testimony established a burglary occurred, the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the specific accused committed the theft, as no direct evidence linked the accused to the crime. 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, UNJHA All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case