THE STATE OF GUJARAT vs SIKANDARBHAI ISMILBHAI MANSURI Advocate - H P MALVI — 377/2026

Case under The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 285. Disposed: Uncontested--LOK ADALAT on 14th March 2026.

Case disposed

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJRJ060005012026

Filing Number

377/2026

Filing Date

11-Mar-2026

Registration No

377/2026

Registration Date

11-Mar-2026

Court

TALUKA COURT, DHORAJI

Judge

1-Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

Decision Date

14-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--LOK ADALAT

Last updated 21-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

11213010260088

Police Station

DHORAJI POLICE STATION - RAJKOT DISTRICT

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 285

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.THE STATE OF GUJARAT

    Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.SIKANDARBHAI ISMILBHAI MANSURI Advocate - H P MALVI

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    JudegementView PDF

    Case Summary The court found the accused Sikandarabhai Ismaailabhai Mansuri guilty under IPC Section 285 (negligent conduct with respect to fire or combustible matter). The accused voluntarily pleaded guilty, and the court considered mitigating factors including that it was his first offense, he is the sole breadwinner of his family, and his commitment to reform. The court sentenced him to a fine of ₹200 or, in default, 3 days of simple imprisonment, applying the principle of minimum punishment while preserving justice. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 14-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  4. 11-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  5. 11-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 377/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary The court found the accused Sikandarabhai Ismaailabhai Mansuri guilty under IPC Section 285 (negligent conduct with respect to fire or combustible matter). The accused voluntarily pleaded guilty, and the court considered mitigating factors including that it was his first offense, he is the sole breadwinner of his family, and his commitment to reform. The court sentenced him to a fine of ₹200 or, in default, 3 days of simple imprisonment, applying the principle of minimum punishment while preserving justice. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case