Government of Gujarat vs RAHUL HARSHADBHAI CHAUDHARI — 1325/2026

Case under The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 111(2)(B),316(5),316(2),318(4),319(2),3(5),61(2). Disposed: Uncontested--COMMITAL on 06th March 2026.

Case disposed

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJMR020016722026

Filing Number

1325/2026

Filing Date

27-Feb-2026

Registration No

1325/2026

Registration Date

27-Feb-2026

Court

CIVIL COURT, MORBI

Judge

4-3rd Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge And A.C.J.M.

Decision Date

06-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--COMMITAL

Last updated 09-Mar-2026

Acts & Sections

The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 111(2)(B),316(5),316(2),318(4),319(2),3(5),61(2)
Information Technology Act, 2000 Section 66(C),66(D)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Government of Gujarat

    Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.RAHUL HARSHADBHAI CHAUDHARI

  2. 2.KHUSH NAVINBHAI BHALODIYA

  3. 3.JAYDEEP RAMBHAI LAGARIYA

  4. 4.SHYAM KISHORBHAI RUPAPARA

  5. 5.RAJUBHAI DEVANANDBHAI NANDANIYA

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 06-Mar-2026

    Order

    The court dismissed the criminal charges against the accused under IPC Sections 111(2)(b), 316(2), 318(4), 319(2), 3(5), and 61(2), along with Section 66(c)(d) of the IT Act, finding insufficient evidence to proceed with trial. The accused were ordered to be enlarged on bail and directed to appear before the Sessions Court in Morbi on the specified date for further proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 06-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    3rd Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge And A.C.J.M.

  4. 05-Mar-2026

    Process To Accused

    3rd Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge And A.C.J.M.

  5. 28-Feb-2026

    Process To Accused

    3rd Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge And A.C.J.M.

  6. 27-Feb-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  7. 27-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 1325/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The court dismissed the criminal charges against the accused under IPC Sections 111(2)(b), 316(2), 318(4), 319(2), 3(5), and 61(2), along with Section 66(c)(d) of the IT Act, finding insufficient evidence to proceed with trial. The accused were ordered to be enlarged on bail and directed to appear before the Sessions Court in Morbi on the specified date for further proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case