Government of Gujarat vs CHUNILAL KARAMABHAI GAMIT Advocate - K V TEMKAR — 1135/2025
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 279,337,338,304(A),. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 24th March 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJNV040013032025
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
1135/2025
Filing Date
29-07-2025
Registration No
1135/2025
Registration Date
29-07-2025
Court
TALUKA COURT, BANSDA
Judge
1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Decision Date
24th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL
FIR Details
FIR Number
11822003240464
Police Station
VANSDA POLICE STATION - NAVSARI DISTRICT
Year
2024
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Government of Gujarat
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
CHUNILAL KARAMABHAI GAMIT Advocate - K V TEMKAR
Hearing History
Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Disposed
JUDGEMENT
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 24-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 09-03-2026 | JUDGEMENT | |
| 02-02-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION | |
| 29-12-2025 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION | |
| 25-11-2025 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION |
Final Orders / Judgements
The court acquitted the accused Chunilal Karmabaai Gamit of charges under IPC sections 279, 337, 338, 304(a) and Motor Vehicles Act sections 177, 184, finding that the prosecution failed to prove beyond doubt that the accused was driving the tempo that caused the accident. The court held that while an accident occurred causing injuries and one death, the prosecution provided no concrete evidence identifying the accused as the vehicle operator or proving rash/negligent driving. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The court acquitted the accused Chunilal Karmabaai Gamit of charges under IPC sections 279, 337, 338, 304(a) and Motor Vehicles Act sections 177, 184, finding that the prosecution failed to prove beyond doubt that the accused was driving the tempo that caused the accident. The court held that while an accident occurred causing injuries and one death, the prosecution provided no concrete evidence identifying the accused as the vehicle operator or proving rash/negligent driving. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts