STATE OF GUJARAT vs PRADEEPBHAI SABURBHAI BARIA Advocate - N U PARMAR — 8/2026

Case under The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 137(2),87,64(2)(I),64(2)(M). Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 22nd May 2026.

PCSO - SPECIAL CASE - PCSO

CNR: GJPM170002892026

Case disposed

Filing Number

8/2026

Filing Date

23-02-2026

Registration No

8/2026

Registration Date

23-02-2026

Court

ADDL. DIST. COURT HALOL

Judge

1-ADDL.DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE

Decision Date

22nd May 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL

FIR Details

FIR Number

587

Police Station

DAMAVAV POLICE STATION - PANCHMAHAL DISTRICT

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

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

Petitioner(s)

STATE OF GUJARAT

Adv. AGP

Respondent(s)

PRADEEPBHAI SABURBHAI BARIA Advocate - N U PARMAR

Hearing History

Judge: 1-ADDL.DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE

22-05-2026

Disposed

21-05-2026

FINAL ARGUMENTS

20-05-2026

FINAL ARGUMENTS

19-05-2026

FURTHER STATEMENT

18-05-2026

EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION

Final Orders / Judgements

22-05-2026
JUDEGEMENT

Summary of Case 8/2026 Court Decision: The Additional Sessions Judge & Special Judge (POCSO) at Halol acquitted the accused, Pradipbhai Saburbhai Baria, of all charges on 22 May 2026, finding the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. Key Finding: The court determined this was a consensual relationship between a 16-year-old girl and the accused. The victim voluntarily went to the accused's house and stayed there. The FIR was lodged only after settlement negotiations failed when the accused's family refused to pay ₹70,000 as demanded during a community "Davo Bhangvo" (bride-price settlement), revealing the case was motivated by extortion rather than genuine criminal complaint. Critical Evidence: The victim herself admitted in cross-examination that the accused did not molest or rape her, that she had a 3-year love relationship with him, and that he never abducted her from parental custody. Medical examination found no evidence of sexual assault (negative UPT test, no semen found, no injury marks). The court found the FIR's oblique motive cast serious doubts on the prosecution's credibility. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary of Case 8/2026 Court Decision: The Additional Sessions Judge & Special Judge (POCSO) at Halol acquitted the accused, Pradipbhai Saburbhai Baria, of all charges on 22 May 2026, finding the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. Key Finding: The court determined this was a consensual relationship between a 16-year-old girl and the accused. The victim voluntarily went to the accused's house and stayed there. The FIR was lodged only after settlement negotiations failed when the accused's family refused to pay ₹70,000 as demanded during a community "Davo Bhangvo" (bride-price settlement), revealing the case was motivated by extortion rather than genuine criminal complaint. Critical Evidence: The victim herself admitted in cross-examination that the accused did not molest or rape her, that she had a 3-year love relationship with him, and that he never abducted her from parental custody. Medical examination found no evidence of sexual assault (negative UPT test, no semen found, no injury marks). The court found the FIR's oblique motive cast serious doubts on the prosecution's credibility. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

ADDL. DIST. COURT HALOL All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case