Government of Gujarat vs Meraman Bhikhu Bhetariya Advocate - D K SONDARVA — 745/2025
Case under The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 281. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 03rd April 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJPB040008752025
Filing Number
745/2025
Filing Date
12-Nov-2025
Registration No
745/2025
Registration Date
12-Nov-2025
Court
TALUKA COURT-KUTIYANA
Judge
1-Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.
Decision Date
03-Apr-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL
Last updated 15-May-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
431
Police Station
KUTIYANA POLICE STATION - PORBANDAR DISTRICT
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Government of Gujarat
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
-
1.Meraman Bhikhu Bhetariya Advocate - D K SONDARVA
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
03-Apr-2026
JudegementView PDF
Summary The court acquitted the accused of charges under IPC Sections 281 and 337/338 due to insufficient evidence. The prosecution failed to establish a credible case, as witness testimonies were contradictory, key details about the incident (vehicle speed, time, location specifics) were not properly documented, and the investigating officer provided no corroborating evidence. Applying the benefit of doubt principle, the court found no conclusive proof of the accused's guilt and ordered acquittal under CrPC Section 248(1). This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
03-Apr-2026
Disposed
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.
-
24-Mar-2026
Judgement
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.
-
11-Mar-2026
Further Statement
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.
-
05-Feb-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.
-
06-Jan-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.
-
09-Dec-2025
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
12-Nov-2025
Case filed
Registration No. 745/2025
Summary The court acquitted the accused of charges under IPC Sections 281 and 337/338 due to insufficient evidence. The prosecution failed to establish a credible case, as witness testimonies were contradictory, key details about the incident (vehicle speed, time, location specifics) were not properly documented, and the investigating officer provided no corroborating evidence. Applying the benefit of doubt principle, the court found no conclusive proof of the accused's guilt and ordered acquittal under CrPC Section 248(1). This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts