Government of Gujarat vs PRAVINBHAI THAKARSHIBHAI SHAPARA Advocate - H B DAVE — 850/2025
Case under The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 281,125(a),125(b). Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 06th March 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJSN040011412025
Filing Number
850/2025
Filing Date
17-Sep-2025
Registration No
850/2025
Registration Date
17-Sep-2025
Court
TALUKA COURT, SAYLA
Judge
28-Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
Decision Date
06-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL
Last updated 15-Mar-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Government of Gujarat
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
-
1.PRAVINBHAI THAKARSHIBHAI SHAPARA Advocate - H B DAVE
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
06-Mar-2026
Judegement
Summary The court acquitted the accused, Pravinbhai Thakarshibhai Shapra, of charges under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) Sections 281, 125(a), 125(b), and Indian Penal Code Sections 177, 184, 134(b), finding insufficient evidence that he recklessly or negligently caused a road accident. While the complainant's injuries were medically confirmed, the prosecution failed to prove the accused personally and intentionally operated the vehicle that caused the collision. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
06-Mar-2026
Disposed
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
26-Feb-2026
Judgement
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
29-Jan-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
29-Dec-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
27-Nov-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
27-Oct-2025
Process To Accused
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
17-Sep-2025
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
17-Sep-2025
Case filed
Registration No. 850/2025
Summary The court acquitted the accused, Pravinbhai Thakarshibhai Shapra, of charges under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) Sections 281, 125(a), 125(b), and Indian Penal Code Sections 177, 184, 134(b), finding insufficient evidence that he recklessly or negligently caused a road accident. While the complainant's injuries were medically confirmed, the prosecution failed to prove the accused personally and intentionally operated the vehicle that caused the collision. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts