Government of Gujarat vs Harshad Arvindbhai Keshavala Advocate - D K SONDARVA — 746/2025
Case under The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 281. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 03rd April 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJPB040008762025
Filing Number
746/2025
Filing Date
12-Nov-2025
Registration No
746/2025
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
432
Police Station
KUTIYANA POLICE STATION - PORBANDAR DISTRICT
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Government of Gujarat
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
-
1.Harshad Arvindbhai Keshavala Advocate - D K SONDARVA
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
03-Apr-2026
JudegementView PDF
Summary The court acquitted the accused of charges under IPC Sections 279 and 337 (rash and negligent driving causing hurt), finding that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. The court noted that the prosecution's evidence lacked support from independent witnesses and neutral authorities, and the accused's testimony regarding the vehicle's condition and the circumstances of the alleged incident remained uncontradicted by credible evidence. 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.
-
12-Mar-2026
Further Statement
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.
-
11-Mar-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
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. 746/2025
Summary The court acquitted the accused of charges under IPC Sections 279 and 337 (rash and negligent driving causing hurt), finding that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. The court noted that the prosecution's evidence lacked support from independent witnesses and neutral authorities, and the accused's testimony regarding the vehicle's condition and the circumstances of the alleged incident remained uncontradicted by credible evidence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts