Government of Gujarat vs LABHUBHAI BACHUBHAI BAJANIYA — 8155/2025
Case under The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 281. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 17th March 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJMR020100492025
Filing Number
8155/2025
Filing Date
08-Oct-2025
Registration No
8155/2025
Registration Date
08-Oct-2025
Court
CIVIL COURT, MORBI
Judge
4-3rd Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge And A.C.J.M.
Decision Date
17-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL
Last updated 05-May-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
1495
Police Station
MORBI B DIV POLICE STATION- MORBI DISTRICT
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Government of Gujarat
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
-
1.LABHUBHAI BACHUBHAI BAJANIYA
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
17-Mar-2026
Judegement
Summary The court acquitted the accused Labhuhai Bachubhai Bajaniya of charges under BNS Section 281 and Motor Vehicles Act Sections 177 and 184 for rash and negligent driving. The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt, as the panch witnesses did not corroborate the allegations and there were gaps in the evidence, including lack of independent witnesses and missing station diary records. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
17-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.
-
19-Feb-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
3rd Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge And A.C.J.M.
-
09-Jan-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
3rd Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge And A.C.J.M.
-
29-Dec-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
3rd Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge And A.C.J.M.
-
26-Nov-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
3rd Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge And A.C.J.M.
-
30-Oct-2025
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
08-Oct-2025
Case filed
Registration No. 8155/2025
Summary The court acquitted the accused Labhuhai Bachubhai Bajaniya of charges under BNS Section 281 and Motor Vehicles Act Sections 177 and 184 for rash and negligent driving. The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt, as the panch witnesses did not corroborate the allegations and there were gaps in the evidence, including lack of independent witnesses and missing station diary records. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts