STATE OF GUJARAT vs SURESHBHAI ARJANBHAI BUBADIYA Advocate - R A PARMAR — 235/2022
Case under Arms Act Section 25 (1-B) A. Disposed: Contested--JUDGEMENT on 08th April 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJSK190002502022
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
235/2022
Filing Date
09-02-2022
Registration No
235/2022
Registration Date
09-02-2022
Court
TALUKA COURT, POSHINA
Judge
1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Decision Date
08th April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGEMENT
FIR Details
FIR Number
109
Police Station
POSHINA POLICE STATION - SABARKANTHA DISTRICT
Year
2019
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
STATE OF GUJARAT
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
SURESHBHAI ARJANBHAI BUBADIYA Advocate - R A PARMAR
Hearing History
Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Disposed
FINAL ARGUMENTS
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 08-04-2026 | Disposed | |
| 07-04-2026 | FINAL ARGUMENTS | |
| 24-03-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION | |
| 07-03-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION | |
| 25-02-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION |
Final Orders / Judgements
Court Decision Summary Case: Criminal Case No. 235/2022 (Posheena Court, Udaipur, Rajasthan) Decision: The court acquitted the accused Sureshbhai Arjunbhai Bundiya of charges under the Arms Act, 1954 (Section 25(1)(a) for illegal firearm possession and Section 135 IPC). The court found that while police witnesses claimed a country-made pistol was recovered from the accused, independent corroborating evidence from neutral witnesses was absent, and the District Magistrate's sanction for prosecution could not be validated as the firearm was not produced before him at the time of granting sanction, violating legal requirements. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Court Decision Summary Case: Criminal Case No. 235/2022 (Posheena Court, Udaipur, Rajasthan) Decision: The court acquitted the accused Sureshbhai Arjunbhai Bundiya of charges under the Arms Act, 1954 (Section 25(1)(a) for illegal firearm possession and Section 135 IPC). The court found that while police witnesses claimed a country-made pistol was recovered from the accused, independent corroborating evidence from neutral witnesses was absent, and the District Magistrate's sanction for prosecution could not be validated as the firearm was not produced before him at the time of granting sanction, violating legal requirements. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts