THE STATE OF GUJARAT vs PARESHBHAI BHIMJIBHAI DHAVA PATEL Advocate - S P BHANDERI — 590/1999
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 406,420,482,483,485,486,487,488. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 30th April 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJRJ040001431999
Filing Number
590/1999
Filing Date
28-04-1999
Registration No
590/1999
Registration Date
28-04-1999
Court
TALUKA COURT, GONDAL
Judge
3-2nd ADDL. SR. CIVIL JUDGE & A.C.J.M.
Decision Date
30th April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL
FIR Details
FIR Number
90
Police Station
GONDAL CITY POLICE STATION - RAJKOT DISTRICT
Year
1999
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
THE STATE OF GUJARAT
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
PARESHBHAI BHIMJIBHAI DHAVA PATEL Advocate - S P BHANDERI
VIJAYBHAI BHIMJIBHAI DHAVA PATEL
Adv. S P BHANDERI
GOVINDBHAI CHANABHAI SAVALIYA
Adv. B P KHANDERIA
DIPAKBHAI MOHANBHAI PARMAR
Hearing History
Judge: 3-2nd ADDL. SR. CIVIL JUDGE & A.C.J.M.
Disposed
JUDGEMENT
FURTHER STATEMENT
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 30-04-2026 | Disposed |
| 27-04-2026 | JUDGEMENT |
| 24-04-2026 | FURTHER STATEMENT |
| 13-04-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION |
| 06-04-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The court acquitted all four accused (Criminal Case No. 590/1999) charged with counterfeiting Castrol engine oil and trade mark violations under IPC Sections 406, 420, 482, 483, 485, 486, 487, 488 and Trade Marks Act Sections 78, 79. The prosecution failed to establish the charges beyond reasonable doubt—key witnesses were unavailable or hostile, evidence was circumstantial, and material recovery lacked corroboration from independent witnesses. Consequently, accused 1 and 2 were acquitted under CrPC Section 248(1), while accused 3 and 4 were acquitted under CrPC Sections 248(1) and 353(6). This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The court acquitted all four accused (Criminal Case No. 590/1999) charged with counterfeiting Castrol engine oil and trade mark violations under IPC Sections 406, 420, 482, 483, 485, 486, 487, 488 and Trade Marks Act Sections 78, 79. The prosecution failed to establish the charges beyond reasonable doubt—key witnesses were unavailable or hostile, evidence was circumstantial, and material recovery lacked corroboration from independent witnesses. Consequently, accused 1 and 2 were acquitted under CrPC Section 248(1), while accused 3 and 4 were acquitted under CrPC Sections 248(1) and 353(6). This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts