GOVERNMENT OF GUJARAT vs SANJAYBHAI GULABBHAI KHANT Advocate - A C BARIA — 1/2026
Case under The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 137(2),64(2)(M). Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 30th April 2026.
PCSO - SPECIAL CASE - PCSO
CNR: GJPM010000202026
Filing Number
1/2026
Filing Date
02-Jan-2026
Registration No
1/2026
Registration Date
02-Jan-2026
Court
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT GODHRA
Judge
2-4th Addl District Judge
Decision Date
30-Apr-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL
Last updated 07-Jun-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
662
Police Station
SHAHERA POLICE STATION - PANCHMAHALS DISTRICT
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.GOVERNMENT OF GUJARAT
Adv. PP
Respondent(s)
-
1.SANJAYBHAI GULABBHAI KHANT Advocate - A C BARIA
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
30-Apr-2026
Judegement
Case Summary: Government of Gujarat v. Sanjaybhai Gulabbhai Khant Court Decision: The accused Sanjaybhai Gulabbhai Khant was acquitted of all charges on April 30, 2026. Key Reasoning: The court found that the prosecution failed to establish beyond reasonable doubt that the victim was a minor at the time of the alleged offense. The victim's birth date could not be reliably proven—the birth certificate submitted appeared forged, and conflicting records existed. Without establishing the victim's minority, the POCSO Act provisions could not apply. Additionally, the court determined that the evidence did not substantiate the charges of kidnapping, sexual abuse, or phone-based sexual harassment, as the victim appeared to have voluntarily accompanied the accused, and no corroborating medical or forensic evidence supported the allegations. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
30-Apr-2026
Disposed
4th Addl District Judge
-
23-Apr-2026
Judgement
4th Addl District Judge
-
15-Apr-2026
Judgement
4th Addl District Judge
-
08-Apr-2026
Final Arguments
4th Addl District Judge
-
02-Apr-2026
Final Arguments
4th Addl District Judge
-
25-Mar-2026
Further Statement
4th Addl District Judge
-
23-Mar-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
4th Addl District Judge
-
18-Mar-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
4th Addl District Judge
-
16-Mar-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
4th Addl District Judge
-
13-Mar-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
4th Addl District Judge
-
10-Mar-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
4th Addl District Judge
-
06-Mar-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
4th Addl District Judge
-
03-Mar-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
4th Addl District Judge
-
27-Feb-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
4th Addl District Judge
-
26-Feb-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
4th Addl District Judge
-
20-Feb-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
4th Addl District Judge
-
17-Feb-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
4th Addl District Judge
-
13-Feb-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
4th Addl District Judge
-
11-Feb-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
4th Addl District Judge
-
06-Feb-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
4th Addl District Judge
-
03-Feb-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
4th Addl District Judge
-
30-Jan-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
4th Addl District Judge
-
28-Jan-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
4th Addl District Judge
-
28-Jan-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
4th Addl District Judge
-
21-Jan-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
4th Addl District Judge
-
19-Jan-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
4th Addl District Judge
-
16-Jan-2026
Appearance Of Party/Pleader
4th Addl District Judge
-
12-Jan-2026
Appearance Of Party/Pleader
4th Addl District Judge
-
08-Jan-2026
Appearance Of Party/Pleader
4th Addl District Judge
-
05-Jan-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
02-Jan-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 1/2026
Case Summary: Government of Gujarat v. Sanjaybhai Gulabbhai Khant Court Decision: The accused Sanjaybhai Gulabbhai Khant was acquitted of all charges on April 30, 2026. Key Reasoning: The court found that the prosecution failed to establish beyond reasonable doubt that the victim was a minor at the time of the alleged offense. The victim's birth date could not be reliably proven—the birth certificate submitted appeared forged, and conflicting records existed. Without establishing the victim's minority, the POCSO Act provisions could not apply. Additionally, the court determined that the evidence did not substantiate the charges of kidnapping, sexual abuse, or phone-based sexual harassment, as the victim appeared to have voluntarily accompanied the accused, and no corroborating medical or forensic evidence supported the allegations. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts