GOVERNMENT OF GUJARAT vs RAJESHBHAI KANABHAI PAGI Advocate - R A HADIYEL — 8/2026

Case under The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 137(2),87,64(2)(M),65(1). Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 11th May 2026.

PCSO - SPECIAL CASE - PCSO

CNR: GJPM010007482026

Case disposed

Filing Number

8/2026

Filing Date

24-02-2026

Registration No

8/2026

Registration Date

24-02-2026

Court

DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT GODHRA

Judge

2-4th ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE

Decision Date

11th May 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL

FIR Details

FIR Number

887

Police Station

SHAHERA POLICE STATION - PANCHMAHALS DISTRICT

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

THE BHARATIYA NYAYA SANHITA, 2023 Section 137(2),87,64(2)(M),65(1)
PROTECTION OF CHILDREN FROM SEXUAL OFFENCES ACT, 2012 Section 4,6,12,17

Petitioner(s)

GOVERNMENT OF GUJARAT

Adv. PP

Respondent(s)

RAJESHBHAI KANABHAI PAGI Advocate - R A HADIYEL

VIJAYBHAI JYANTIBHAI PAGI

Adv. D A SHETH

Hearing History

Judge: 2-4th ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE

11-05-2026

Disposed

07-05-2026

JUDGEMENT

05-05-2026

EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION

01-05-2026

EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION

29-04-2026

EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION

Final Orders / Judgements

11-05-2026
JUDEGEMENT

Case Summary: Special POCSO Case No. 8/2026 Court Decision: Both accused, Rajeshbhai Kanabhai Pagi and Vijaybhai Jyantibhai Pagi, were acquitted of all charges under IPC sections 137(2), 87, 64(2)(m), 65(1), 54 and POCSO Act sections 4, 6, 12, 17. The court found insufficient direct evidence to prove the prosecution's case beyond reasonable doubt, despite circumstantial evidence and medical examinations. The victim's testimony did not corroborate the alleged kidnapping and sexual abuse claims. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: Special POCSO Case No. 8/2026 Court Decision: Both accused, Rajeshbhai Kanabhai Pagi and Vijaybhai Jyantibhai Pagi, were acquitted of all charges under IPC sections 137(2), 87, 64(2)(m), 65(1), 54 and POCSO Act sections 4, 6, 12, 17. The court found insufficient direct evidence to prove the prosecution's case beyond reasonable doubt, despite circumstantial evidence and medical examinations. The victim's testimony did not corroborate the alleged kidnapping and sexual abuse claims. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT GODHRA All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case