The State of Gujarat vs ramu dudabhai parmar Advocate - J M CHAVDA — 836/2026

Case under Gujarat (bombay) Police Act, 1951 Section 135. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 16th May 2026.

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJPB020011252026

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

19-02-2026

Filing Number

836/2026

Filing Date

27-02-2026

Registration No

836/2026

Registration Date

27-02-2026

Court

CIVIL COURT PORBANDAR

Judge

5-2nd ADDL. SR. CIVIL JUDGE & A.C.J.M.

Decision Date

16th May 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL

FIR Details

FIR Number

363

Police Station

MADHAVPUR POLICE STATION - PORBANDAR DISTRICT

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

GUJARAT (BOMBAY) POLICE ACT, 1951 Section 135

Petitioner(s)

The State of Gujarat

Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

ramu dudabhai parmar Advocate - J M CHAVDA

Hearing History

Judge: 5-2nd ADDL. SR. CIVIL JUDGE & A.C.J.M.

16-05-2026

Disposed

15-05-2026

FINAL ARGUMENTS

12-05-2026

FURTHER STATEMENT

11-05-2026

EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION

01-05-2026

EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION

Final Orders / Judgements

16-05-2026
JUDEGEMENT

Case Summary: 836/2026 The court acquitted the accused, Ramu Dudhabhai Parmar, of charges under Gujarat Police Act Section 135 (carrying a weapon in public in violation of a weapons ban proclamation). The prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused carried a plastic-handled knife worth ₹20 on December 24, 2025. Key weaknesses included: panchas (witnesses) who signed the seizure document retracted their testimony and denied witnessing the actual incident; no independent witnesses corroborated police claims; and only police statements supported the case without neutral corroboration. The court found reasonable doubt about the accused's arrest and recovery of the weapon, ruling that benefit of doubt must favor the accused. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: 836/2026 The court acquitted the accused, Ramu Dudhabhai Parmar, of charges under Gujarat Police Act Section 135 (carrying a weapon in public in violation of a weapons ban proclamation). The prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused carried a plastic-handled knife worth ₹20 on December 24, 2025. Key weaknesses included: panchas (witnesses) who signed the seizure document retracted their testimony and denied witnessing the actual incident; no independent witnesses corroborated police claims; and only police statements supported the case without neutral corroboration. The court found reasonable doubt about the accused's arrest and recovery of the weapon, ruling that benefit of doubt must favor the accused. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

CIVIL COURT PORBANDAR All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case