STATE OF GUJARAT vs DIPESHBHAI MANSHINGBHAI BORSA Advocate - S S DABKE — 23/2026

Case under The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 281. Disposed: Uncontested--LOK ADALAT on 14th March 2026.

Case disposed

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJNV130000342026

Filing Number

23/2026

Filing Date

25-Feb-2026

Registration No

23/2026

Registration Date

25-Feb-2026

Court

TALUKA COURT, SUBIR

Judge

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

Decision Date

14-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--LOK ADALAT

Last updated 16-Apr-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

11219003250347

Police Station

SUBIR POLICE STATION - DANG DISTRICT

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 281

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF GUJARAT

    Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.DIPESHBHAI MANSHINGBHAI BORSA Advocate - S S DABKE

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

    The court convicted the accused under IPC Section 281 (rash or negligent act endangering human life) and sentenced him to a fine of Rs. 200 (or two days simple imprisonment in default), considering his voluntary confession, financial hardship as the sole family earner, and the principles of justice. The court also ordered that any seized articles be returned to their rightful owner and that the bail bond remain valid for six months. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 14-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  4. 09-Mar-2026

    Plea

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  5. 03-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 25-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 23/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The court convicted the accused under IPC Section 281 (rash or negligent act endangering human life) and sentenced him to a fine of Rs. 200 (or two days simple imprisonment in default), considering his voluntary confession, financial hardship as the sole family earner, and the principles of justice. The court also ordered that any seized articles be returned to their rightful owner and that the bail bond remain valid for six months. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case