Government of Gujarat vs ANILKUMAR RAMKUMAR MAHATO — 183/2026
Case under The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 281. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 16th March 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJMR020002102026
Filing Number
183/2026
Filing Date
07-Jan-2026
Registration No
183/2026
Registration Date
07-Jan-2026
Court
CIVIL COURT, MORBI
Judge
4-3rd Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge And A.C.J.M.
Decision Date
16-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL
Last updated 05-May-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
2255
Police Station
MORBI B DIV POLICE STATION- MORBI DISTRICT
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Government of Gujarat
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
-
1.ANILKUMAR RAMKUMAR MAHATO
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
16-Mar-2026
JudegementView PDF
Summary The court acquitted accused Anilkumar Ramkumar Mahto of charges under BNS Section 281 and Motor Vehicles Act Sections 177 and 184 for rash/negligent driving, finding insufficient evidence. The prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused was driving the vehicle rashly or negligently, as the independent witness (panchayat members) did not corroborate the FIR allegations, and no independent corroborating witnesses were recorded. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
16-Mar-2026
Disposed
3rd Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge And A.C.J.M.
-
10-Mar-2026
Further Statement
3rd Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge And A.C.J.M.
-
07-Mar-2026
Further Statement
3rd Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge And A.C.J.M.
-
28-Feb-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
3rd Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge And A.C.J.M.
-
21-Feb-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
3rd Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge And A.C.J.M.
-
31-Jan-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
07-Jan-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 183/2026
Summary The court acquitted accused Anilkumar Ramkumar Mahto of charges under BNS Section 281 and Motor Vehicles Act Sections 177 and 184 for rash/negligent driving, finding insufficient evidence. The prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused was driving the vehicle rashly or negligently, as the independent witness (panchayat members) did not corroborate the FIR allegations, and no independent corroborating witnesses were recorded. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts