GOVERNMENT OF GUJARAT vs RAJESHBHAI VALJIBHAI ROKAL — 63/2024
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 306,323,387,504,506(2),114. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 05th May 2026.
SC - SESSIONS CASE
CNR: GJRJ010024792024
Filing Number
63/2024
Filing Date
27-Mar-2024
Registration No
63/2024
Registration Date
27-Mar-2024
Court
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT RAJKOT
Judge
2-8th Addl District Judge
Decision Date
05-May-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL
Last updated 16-May-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
11208056240010
Police Station
THORALA POLICE STATION - RAJKOT DISTRICT
Year
2024
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.GOVERNMENT OF GUJARAT
Adv. K B DODIYA-G/1373/2003
Respondent(s)
-
1.RAJESHBHAI VALJIBHAI ROKAL
-
2.SANJAYBHAI VALJIBHAI ROKAD
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
05-May-2026
JudegementView PDF
Summary The court acquitted both accused (Rajshabhhai and Sanjayabhhai) of charges under IPC sections 306, 323, 386, 387, 504, 506(2), and 114, finding insufficient evidence that they abetted the deceased's suicide. While the prosecution alleged the accused extorted money and made threats leading to the victim's death, the court found the key witness (complainant's son) and family members could not substantiate these claims during cross-examination, and critical evidence regarding a suicide note contained inconsistencies and gaps in custody records. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
05-May-2026
Disposed
8th Addl District Judge
-
30-Apr-2026
Final Arguments
8th Addl District Judge
-
29-Apr-2026
Final Arguments
8th Addl District Judge
-
23-Apr-2026
Final Arguments
8th Addl District Judge
-
09-Apr-2026
Further Statement
8th Addl District Judge
-
08-Apr-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
8th Addl District Judge
-
11-Mar-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
9th Addl District Judge
-
19-Feb-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
9th Addl District Judge
-
23-Jan-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
10th Addl District Judge
-
08-Jan-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
10th Addl District Judge
-
20-Dec-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
11th Addl District Judge
-
09-Dec-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
11th Addl District Judge
-
26-Nov-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
11th Addl District Judge
-
14-Nov-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
11th Addl District Judge
-
04-Nov-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
11th Addl District Judge
-
15-Oct-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
11th Addl District Judge
-
08-Oct-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
11th Addl District Judge
-
18-Sep-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
11th Addl District Judge
-
20-Aug-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
12th Addl District Judge
-
16-Jul-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
12th Addl District Judge
-
17-Jun-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
14th Addl District Judge
-
30-May-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
14th Addl District Judge
-
09-May-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
11th Addl District Judge
-
04-Apr-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
11th Addl District Judge
-
28-Feb-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
11th Addl District Judge
-
24-Jan-2025
Framing Of Charge/Plea
11th Addl District Judge
-
20-Dec-2024
Framing Of Charge/Plea
11th Addl District Judge
-
07-Nov-2024
Framing Of Charge/Plea
11th Addl District Judge
-
20-Sep-2024
Process To Accused
11th Addl District Judge
-
09-Aug-2024
Process To Accused
12th Addl District Judge
-
10-Jul-2024
Process To Accused
12th Addl District Judge
-
06-Jun-2024
Process To Accused
12th Addl District Judge
-
14-May-2024
Process To Accused
9th Addl District Judge
-
30-Apr-2024
Process To Accused
9th Addl District Judge
-
16-Apr-2024
Process To Accused
Principal District Judge, Rajkot
-
03-Apr-2024
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
27-Mar-2024
Case filed
Registration No. 63/2024
Summary The court acquitted both accused (Rajshabhhai and Sanjayabhhai) of charges under IPC sections 306, 323, 386, 387, 504, 506(2), and 114, finding insufficient evidence that they abetted the deceased's suicide. While the prosecution alleged the accused extorted money and made threats leading to the victim's death, the court found the key witness (complainant's son) and family members could not substantiate these claims during cross-examination, and critical evidence regarding a suicide note contained inconsistencies and gaps in custody records. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts