Government of Gujarat vs Umeshbhai Bhanjibhai Charoliya Advocate - J S MAKWANA — 2751/2025

Case under The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 303(2),54. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 24th March 2026.

Case disposed

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJRJ050036422025

Filing Number

2751/2025

Filing Date

12-Nov-2025

Registration No

2751/2025

Registration Date

12-Nov-2025

Court

TALUKA COURT, JETPUR

Judge

1-Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

Decision Date

24-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL

Last updated 16-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

11213022240682

Police Station

JETPUR CITY POLICE STATION - RAJKOT DISTRICT

Year

2024

Acts & Sections

The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 303(2),54

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Government of Gujarat

    Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Umeshbhai Bhanjibhai Charoliya Advocate - J S MAKWANA

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 24-Mar-2026

    JudegementView PDF

    Summary The court acquitted the accused (Umeshbhai Bhanjibhai Charola) of charges under BNS Sections 303(2), 54, and 317(2) (theft, abetment, and receiving stolen property worth ₹60,000) due to insufficient evidence. The prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, as the complainant's testimony was contradictory and unsupported by corroborating evidence. The court ordered the accused's release on bail of ₹5,000. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 24-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  4. 11-Mar-2026

    Final Arguments

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  5. 22-Jan-2026

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  6. 12-Nov-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  7. 12-Nov-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. 2751/2025

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The court acquitted the accused (Umeshbhai Bhanjibhai Charola) of charges under BNS Sections 303(2), 54, and 317(2) (theft, abetment, and receiving stolen property worth ₹60,000) due to insufficient evidence. The prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, as the complainant's testimony was contradictory and unsupported by corroborating evidence. The court ordered the accused's release on bail of ₹5,000. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case