Government of Gujarat vs DIPAKBHAI BHOVANBHAI GAYAKVAD Advocate - I U JADAV — 29/2026

Case under The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 281. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 09th March 2026.

Case disposed

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJNV070000372026

Filing Number

29/2026

Filing Date

08-Jan-2026

Registration No

29/2026

Registration Date

08-Jan-2026

Court

TALUKA COURT, AHWA

Judge

1-Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

Decision Date

09-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL

Last updated 16-Apr-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

11219030250353

Police Station

SAPUTARA POLICE STATION - DANGS DISTRICT

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 281

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Government of Gujarat

    Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.DIPAKBHAI BHOVANBHAI GAYAKVAD Advocate - I U JADAV

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 09-Mar-2026

    JudegementView PDF

    Court Decision Summary The Ahmedabad Judicial Magistrate Court acquitted the accused Dipakbhai Bhovanbhai Gayakwad under IPC Section 281 (rash or negligent act endangering life). The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the charge beyond reasonable doubt, as the case witness evidence was insufficient and lacked corroboration from independent witnesses or proper documentary evidence to establish the accused's guilt conclusively. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 09-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  4. 26-Feb-2026

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  5. 30-Jan-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 08-Jan-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 29/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Court Decision Summary The Ahmedabad Judicial Magistrate Court acquitted the accused Dipakbhai Bhovanbhai Gayakwad under IPC Section 281 (rash or negligent act endangering life). The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the charge beyond reasonable doubt, as the case witness evidence was insufficient and lacked corroboration from independent witnesses or proper documentary evidence to establish the accused's guilt conclusively. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case