GOVERNMENT OF GUJARAT vs RAVINDRABHAI BALUBHAI BARIA Advocate - V Y TRIPATHI — 64/2025

Case under The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 87,137(2),64(1)(2)(M),65(1). Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 01st April 2026.

Case disposed

PCSO - SPECIAL CASE - PCSO

CNR: GJPM010040242025

Filing Number

64/2025

Filing Date

21-Nov-2025

Registration No

64/2025

Registration Date

21-Nov-2025

Court

DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT GODHRA

Judge

2-4th Addl District Judge

Decision Date

01-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL

Last updated 07-Jun-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

883

Police Station

GODHRA TALUKA POLICE STATION - PANCHMAHALS DISTRICT

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 87,137(2),64(1)(2)(M),65(1)
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 Section 4,6,12

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.GOVERNMENT OF GUJARAT

    Adv. PP

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.RAVINDRABHAI BALUBHAI BARIA Advocate - V Y TRIPATHI

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 01-Apr-2026

    JudegementView PDF

    Case Summary: Special POCSO Case 64/2025 Court Decision: Acquittal The accused, Ravindrabhai Balubhai Baria, was acquitted of all charges under IPC Sections 87, 137(2), 64(1)(2)(m), 69(1) and POCSO Act Sections 4, 6, 12. The court found the prosecution failed to establish beyond reasonable doubt that the victim was a minor at the time of the alleged offense and could not prove kidnapping or sexual assault, noting the victim accompanied the accused voluntarily and no inducement was proven. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 01-Apr-2026

    Disposed

    4th Addl District Judge

  4. 23-Mar-2026

    Judgement

    4th Addl District Judge

  5. 20-Mar-2026

    Final Arguments

    4th Addl District Judge

  6. 13-Mar-2026

    Final Arguments

    4th Addl District Judge

  7. 09-Mar-2026

    Further Statement

    4th Addl District Judge

  8. 02-Mar-2026

    Further Statement

    4th Addl District Judge

  9. 27-Feb-2026

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    4th Addl District Judge

  10. 25-Feb-2026

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    4th Addl District Judge

  11. 20-Feb-2026

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    4th Addl District Judge

  12. 18-Feb-2026

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    4th Addl District Judge

  13. 16-Feb-2026

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    4th Addl District Judge

  14. 13-Feb-2026

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    4th Addl District Judge

  15. 11-Feb-2026

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    4th Addl District Judge

  16. 06-Feb-2026

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    4th Addl District Judge

  17. 03-Feb-2026

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    4th Addl District Judge

  18. 30-Jan-2026

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    4th Addl District Judge

  19. 27-Jan-2026

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    4th Addl District Judge

  20. 21-Jan-2026

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    4th Addl District Judge

  21. 17-Jan-2026

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    4th Addl District Judge

  22. 13-Jan-2026

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    4th Addl District Judge

  23. 07-Jan-2026

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    4th Addl District Judge

  24. 26-Dec-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    4th Addl District Judge

  25. 18-Dec-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    4th Addl District Judge

  26. 10-Dec-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    4th Addl District Judge

  27. 06-Dec-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    4th Addl District Judge

  28. 02-Dec-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    4th Addl District Judge

  29. 28-Nov-2025

    Framing Of Charge/Plea

    4th Addl District Judge

  30. 24-Nov-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  31. 21-Nov-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. 64/2025

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: Special POCSO Case 64/2025 Court Decision: Acquittal The accused, Ravindrabhai Balubhai Baria, was acquitted of all charges under IPC Sections 87, 137(2), 64(1)(2)(m), 69(1) and POCSO Act Sections 4, 6, 12. The court found the prosecution failed to establish beyond reasonable doubt that the victim was a minor at the time of the alleged offense and could not prove kidnapping or sexual assault, noting the victim accompanied the accused voluntarily and no inducement was proven. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case