The State Of Gujarat vs KSHITIJSINH SATUBHA THAKOR — 60/2017
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 409. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 02nd April 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJRJ090001932017
Filing Number
60/2017
Filing Date
01-04-2017
Registration No
60/2017
Registration Date
01-04-2017
Court
TALUKA COURT, LODHIKA
Judge
1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Decision Date
02nd April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL
FIR Details
FIR Number
30
Police Station
LODHIKA POLICE STATION - RAJKOT DISTRICT
Year
2003
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
The State Of Gujarat
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
KSHITIJSINH SATUBHA THAKOR
Hearing History
Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Disposed
JUDGEMENT
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 02-04-2026 | Disposed |
| 11-03-2026 | JUDGEMENT |
| 06-03-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION |
| 06-02-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION |
| 04-12-2025 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The court acquitted Kshitijsinh Satubha Thakor of criminal breach of trust charges under Section 409 IPC, finding that the prosecution failed to prove the essential ingredients of the offense beyond reasonable doubt. The court noted critical gaps in evidence: no appointment letter establishing the accused's official status, lack of written authorization for cash collection duties, failure to prove the accused's handwriting on altered bills, and absence of eyewitness testimony or bank records proving misappropriation. The court emphasized that suspicion alone cannot substitute for conclusive proof in criminal proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The court acquitted Kshitijsinh Satubha Thakor of criminal breach of trust charges under Section 409 IPC, finding that the prosecution failed to prove the essential ingredients of the offense beyond reasonable doubt. The court noted critical gaps in evidence: no appointment letter establishing the accused's official status, lack of written authorization for cash collection duties, failure to prove the accused's handwriting on altered bills, and absence of eyewitness testimony or bank records proving misappropriation. The court emphasized that suspicion alone cannot substitute for conclusive proof in criminal proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts