STATE OF GUJARAT vs RAJNIKANTBHAI HARESHBHAI PATADIYA Advocate - M V BARAIYA — 840/2025
Case under The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 281. Disposed: Contested--JUDGEMENT on 01st April 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJMR050009992025
Filing Number
840/2025
Filing Date
30-Sep-2025
Registration No
840/2025
Registration Date
30-Sep-2025
Court
TALUKA COURT, TANKARA
Judge
1-Principal CIVIL Judge And J.M.F.C
Decision Date
01-Apr-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGEMENT
Last updated 19-Jun-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
11189006250614
Police Station
TANKARA POLICE STATION - MORBI DISTRICT
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.STATE OF GUJARAT
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
-
1.RAJNIKANTBHAI HARESHBHAI PATADIYA Advocate - M V BARAIYA
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
01-Apr-2026
Judegement
The Judicial Magistrate acquitted defendant Rajnikantbhai Hareshbhai Patadiya of charges under BNS Section 281 and MV Act Sections 177, 184, finding insufficient evidence to prove the prosecution's case beyond reasonable doubt. The court determined that witness testimony failed to establish that the defendant recklessly or negligently operated his Super Carry vehicle in a manner endangering human life. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
01-Apr-2026
Disposed
Principal CIVIL Judge And J.M.F.C
-
17-Mar-2026
Further Statement
Principal CIVIL Judge And J.M.F.C
-
07-Mar-2026
Further Statement
Principal CIVIL Judge And J.M.F.C
-
07-Feb-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal CIVIL Judge And J.M.F.C
-
31-Jan-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal CIVIL Judge And J.M.F.C
-
07-Jan-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal CIVIL Judge And J.M.F.C
-
15-Dec-2025
Process To Accused
Principal CIVIL Judge And J.M.F.C
-
12-Nov-2025
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
30-Sep-2025
Case filed
Registration No. 840/2025
The Judicial Magistrate acquitted defendant Rajnikantbhai Hareshbhai Patadiya of charges under BNS Section 281 and MV Act Sections 177, 184, finding insufficient evidence to prove the prosecution's case beyond reasonable doubt. The court determined that witness testimony failed to establish that the defendant recklessly or negligently operated his Super Carry vehicle in a manner endangering human life. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts