Government of Gujarat vs PATANI DINESHBHAI MAHESHBHAI — 3845/2025
Case under The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 303(2),. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 01st April 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJPT020056232025
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
3845/2025
Filing Date
25-11-2025
Registration No
3845/2025
Registration Date
25-11-2025
Court
CIVIL COURT PATAN
Judge
2-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE
Decision Date
01st April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL
FIR Details
FIR Number
11217020250147
Police Station
B DIVISION POLICE STATION - PATAN DISTRICT
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Government of Gujarat
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
PATANI DINESHBHAI MAHESHBHAI
Hearing History
Judge: 2-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE
Disposed
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 01-04-2026 | Disposed | |
| 20-03-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION | |
| 07-03-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION | |
| 13-02-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION | |
| 09-02-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION |
Final Orders / Judgements
Court Decision Summary The Patan Chief Judicial Magistrate Court acquitted accused Dineshbhai Meheshbhai Patni of theft charges under BNS Section 303(2), finding the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. The complainant's testimony regarding the alleged theft of a mobile phone valued at ₹5,000 on 11/02/2025 lacked corroborating evidence, and critical witnesses including the panchnama witnesses and investigation officer were not examined, making it impossible to establish guilt conclusively. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Court Decision Summary The Patan Chief Judicial Magistrate Court acquitted accused Dineshbhai Meheshbhai Patni of theft charges under BNS Section 303(2), finding the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. The complainant's testimony regarding the alleged theft of a mobile phone valued at ₹5,000 on 11/02/2025 lacked corroborating evidence, and critical witnesses including the panchnama witnesses and investigation officer were not examined, making it impossible to establish guilt conclusively. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts