THE STATE OF GUJARAT vs SHANTILAL RAVA PADVI Advocate - V R VALVI — 1280/2025
Case under The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 281,. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 10th April 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJNR030014372025
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
1280/2025
Filing Date
31-07-2025
Registration No
1280/2025
Registration Date
31-07-2025
Court
TALUKA COURT, SAGBARA
Judge
1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Decision Date
10th April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL
FIR Details
FIR Number
11823021250106
Police Station
SAGBARA POLICE STATION- NARMADA DISTRICT
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
THE STATE OF GUJARAT
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
SHANTILAL RAVA PADVI Advocate - V R VALVI
Hearing History
Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Disposed
JUDGEMENT
FURTHER STATEMENT
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 10-04-2026 | Disposed | |
| 25-03-2026 | JUDGEMENT | |
| 10-03-2026 | FURTHER STATEMENT | |
| 03-02-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION | |
| 30-12-2025 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION |
Final Orders / Judgements
Court Decision Summary The Judicial Magistrate First Class, Sagbara, acquitted Shantilal Bhai Ravabal Padvi of charges under IPC Section 281 and Motor Vehicle Act Sections 3 and 181 for rash/negligent driving without a valid license. The court found the prosecution failed to establish the case beyond reasonable doubt, as the panchnama (site inspection) witnesses could not corroborate the allegations and no independent evidence proved the accused was driving recklessly or dangerously. The defendant benefited from the presumption of innocence due to insufficient reliable and credible evidence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Court Decision Summary The Judicial Magistrate First Class, Sagbara, acquitted Shantilal Bhai Ravabal Padvi of charges under IPC Section 281 and Motor Vehicle Act Sections 3 and 181 for rash/negligent driving without a valid license. The court found the prosecution failed to establish the case beyond reasonable doubt, as the panchnama (site inspection) witnesses could not corroborate the allegations and no independent evidence proved the accused was driving recklessly or dangerously. The defendant benefited from the presumption of innocence due to insufficient reliable and credible evidence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts