Government of Gujarat vs alpeshbhai karashanbhai kamariya Advocate - A V GADARA — 553/2025

Case under Gujarat (Bombay) Prevention of Gambling Act, 1887 Section 12. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 06th April 2026.

Case disposed

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJRJ100006912025

e-Filing Number

08-10-2025

Filing Number

553/2025

Filing Date

17-Nov-2025

Registration No

553/2025

Registration Date

17-Nov-2025

Court

TALUKA COURT, PADDHARI

Judge

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

Decision Date

06-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL

Last updated 16-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

445

Police Station

PADDHARI POLICE STATION - RAJKOT DISTRICT

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

Gujarat (Bombay) Prevention of Gambling Act, 1887 Section 12

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Government of Gujarat

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.alpeshbhai karashanbhai kamariya Advocate - A V GADARA

  2. 2.pareshbhai girdharbhai javiya

    Adv. A V GADARA

  3. 3.hardik kamleshbhai koringa

    Adv. A V GADARA

  4. 4.naimish devakaranbhai rangapariya

    Adv. A V GADARA

  5. 5.mahendrabhai pragajibhai kamariya

    Adv. A V GADARA

  6. 6.prakash jasavatbhai mendapara

    Adv. A V GADARA

  7. 7.yatin chandubhai kamariya

    Adv. A V GADARA

  8. 8.pankaj bhimajibhai kalavadiya

    Adv. A V GADARA

  9. 9.rintu karashanbhai kamariya

    Adv. A V GADARA

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 06-Apr-2026

    JudegementView PDF

    Case Summary: CC No.553-2025 The court acquitted all nine accused of gambling charges under Section 12 of the Gambling Act, finding that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. The key weakness in the prosecution's case was that the panchnama (official memo of seizure) lacked corroboration from independent witnesses—the panch signatories could not substantiate the alleged recovery of Rs. 72,700 and gambling equipment, and the police witnesses admitted to procedural gaps including lack of station diary entries and no documentary evidence of the location. Consequently, the court gave the benefit of doubt to the accused and ordered their acquittal while directing bail forfeiture under CrPC Section 481(1). This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 06-Apr-2026

    Disposed

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  4. 24-Mar-2026

    Judgement

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  5. 13-Mar-2026

    Judgement

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  6. 11-Mar-2026

    Final Arguments

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  7. 20-Feb-2026

    Further Statement

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  8. 30-Jan-2026

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  9. 08-Jan-2026

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  10. 12-Dec-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  11. 17-Nov-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  12. 17-Nov-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. 553/2025

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: CC No.553-2025 The court acquitted all nine accused of gambling charges under Section 12 of the Gambling Act, finding that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. The key weakness in the prosecution's case was that the panchnama (official memo of seizure) lacked corroboration from independent witnesses—the panch signatories could not substantiate the alleged recovery of Rs. 72,700 and gambling equipment, and the police witnesses admitted to procedural gaps including lack of station diary entries and no documentary evidence of the location. Consequently, the court gave the benefit of doubt to the accused and ordered their acquittal while directing bail forfeiture under CrPC Section 481(1). This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case