Government of Gujarat vs BHOLA S/O KALU KASHYAP Advocate - V A NAIK — 4/2025

Case under The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 137(2),87,64(2)(I)(M),65(1). Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY CONVICTION on 05th June 2026.

Case disposed

PCSO - SPECIAL CASE -\PCSO

CNR: GJNV010006622025

Filing Number

4/2025

Filing Date

21-Mar-2025

Registration No

4/2025

Registration Date

21-Mar-2025

Court

DISTRICT COURT, NAVSARI

Judge

3-Addl. District Judge

Decision Date

05-Jun-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--JUDGMENT BY CONVICTION

Last updated 18-Jul-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

11822004250045

Police Station

KHERGAM POLICE STATION - NAVSARI\ DISTRICT

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 137(2),87,64(2)(I)(M),65(1)
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 Section 3(A),4,5(L),6,12

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Government of Gujarat

    Adv. B.G.GUPTA -PP[1]-(G/PP)

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.BHOLA S/O KALU KASHYAP Advocate - V A NAIK

  2. 2.MANGE S/O CHANDRAPAAL KASHYAP

    Adv. V A NAIK

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 05-Jun-2026

    JudegementView PDF

    POCSO CASE NO-04-2025 Summary Court's Decision: The court convicted both accused—a male and female minor—under IPC Section 137(2), 87, 64(2) (regarding child protection) and Sections 3(a), 4, 5(e), 6, 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012. The male victim-turned-accused was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment, and the female accused received substantial sentencing for child sexual abuse offences. Both convictions were supported by corroborative medical evidence, testimony, and circumstantial facts establishing that sexual contact occurred between the minors during their displacement/migration, though the exact circumstances remained disputed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 05-Jun-2026

    Disposed

    Addl. District Judge

  4. 02-Jun-2026

    Judgement

    Addl. District Judge

  5. 26-May-2026

    Judgement

    Addl. District Judge

  6. 18-May-2026

    Judgement

    Addl. District Judge

  7. 16-May-2026

    Final Arguments

    Addl. District Judge

  8. 14-May-2026

    Final Arguments

    Addl. District Judge

  9. 13-May-2026

    Final Arguments

    Addl. District Judge

  10. 30-Mar-2026

    Final Arguments

    Addl. District Judge

  11. 28-Feb-2026

    Further Statement

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  12. 16-Feb-2026

    Further Statement

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  13. 27-Jan-2026

    Further Statement

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  14. 12-Jan-2026

    Further Statement

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  15. 26-Dec-2025

    Further Statement

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  16. 24-Dec-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  17. 08-Dec-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  18. 01-Dec-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  19. 17-Nov-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  20. 03-Nov-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  21. 27-Oct-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  22. 13-Oct-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  23. 29-Sep-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  24. 17-Sep-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  25. 16-Sep-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  26. 15-Sep-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  27. 04-Sep-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  28. 03-Sep-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  29. 02-Sep-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  30. 01-Sep-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  31. 19-Aug-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  32. 11-Aug-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  33. 30-Jul-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  34. 23-Jul-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  35. 22-Jul-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  36. 21-Jul-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  37. 18-Jul-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  38. 17-Jul-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  39. 15-Jul-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  40. 10-Jul-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  41. 01-Jul-2025

    Framing Of Charge/Plea

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  42. 17-Jun-2025

    Documentary Evidence

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  43. 03-Jun-2025

    Documentary Evidence

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  44. 20-May-2025

    Documentary Evidence

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  45. 06-May-2025

    Documentary Evidence

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  46. 22-Apr-2025

    Documentary Evidence

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  47. 08-Apr-2025

    Documentary Evidence

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  48. 04-Apr-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  49. 21-Mar-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. 4/2025

casestatus.in Summary

POCSO CASE NO-04-2025 Summary Court's Decision: The court convicted both accused—a male and female minor—under IPC Section 137(2), 87, 64(2) (regarding child protection) and Sections 3(a), 4, 5(e), 6, 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012. The male victim-turned-accused was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment, and the female accused received substantial sentencing for child sexual abuse offences. Both convictions were supported by corroborative medical evidence, testimony, and circumstantial facts establishing that sexual contact occurred between the minors during their displacement/migration, though the exact circumstances remained disputed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case