THE STATE OF GUJARAT vs DILIPBHAI NANDRAMBHAI HARIYANI Advocate - M R RAVIYA — 153/2025

Case under The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 281,106,125(A),125(B). Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 12th March 2026.

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJRJ140002102025

Case disposed

Filing Number

153/2025

Filing Date

27-02-2025

Registration No

153/2025

Registration Date

27-02-2025

Court

TALUKA COURT, JASDAN

Judge

1-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDL. CJM

Decision Date

12th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL

FIR Details

FIR Number

11213092240535

Police Station

ATKOT POLICE STATION - RAJKOT DISTRICT

Year

2024

Acts & Sections

THE BHARATIYA NYAYA SANHITA, 2023 Section 281,106,125(A),125(B)
MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988 Section 177,184,134

Petitioner(s)

THE STATE OF GUJARAT

Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

DILIPBHAI NANDRAMBHAI HARIYANI Advocate - M R RAVIYA

Hearing History

Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDL. CJM

12-03-2026

Disposed

11-03-2026

JUDGEMENT

10-03-2026

FURTHER STATEMENT

03-03-2026

EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION

04-02-2026

EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION

Final Orders / Judgements

12-03-2026
JUDEGEMENT

SUMMARY The court acquitted the accused of charges under IPC Sections 279, 281, 304-A and relevant Motor Vehicles Act sections in a fatal motor accident case. The court found that while an accident occurred resulting in death, the prosecution failed to establish through clear and convincing evidence that the accused drove the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner. The absence of eyewitness testimony to the actual accident, combined with the complainant's own admission of not witnessing the incident, rendered the prosecution's case insufficient to prove criminal rashness or negligence beyond reasonable doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

SUMMARY The court acquitted the accused of charges under IPC Sections 279, 281, 304-A and relevant Motor Vehicles Act sections in a fatal motor accident case. The court found that while an accident occurred resulting in death, the prosecution failed to establish through clear and convincing evidence that the accused drove the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner. The absence of eyewitness testimony to the actual accident, combined with the complainant's own admission of not witnessing the incident, rendered the prosecution's case insufficient to prove criminal rashness or negligence beyond reasonable doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

TALUKA COURT, JASDAN All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case