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
Filing Number
3845/2025
Filing Date
25-Nov-2025
Registration No
3845/2025
Registration Date
25-Nov-2025
Court
CIVIL COURT PATAN
Judge
2-Principal Senior CIVIL Judge
Decision Date
01-Apr-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL
Last updated 03-Apr-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
11217020250147
Police Station
B DIVISION POLICE STATION - PATAN DISTRICT
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Government of Gujarat
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
-
1.PATANI DINESHBHAI MAHESHBHAI
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
01-Apr-2026
JudegementView PDF
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.
-
01-Apr-2026
Disposed
Principal Senior CIVIL Judge
-
20-Mar-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal Senior CIVIL Judge
-
07-Mar-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal Senior CIVIL Judge
-
13-Feb-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal Senior CIVIL Judge
-
09-Feb-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal Senior CIVIL Judge
-
17-Jan-2026
Process To Accused
Principal Senior CIVIL Judge
-
20-Dec-2025
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
25-Nov-2025
Case filed
Registration No. 3845/2025
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.
Explore other courts