Government of Gujarat vs ARJUN SANTOSH SUKHLAL AHIRE Advocate - D R RANA — 25/2025
Case under The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 137(2),87,64,64(2)(F). Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 10th April 2026.
PCSO - SPECIAL CASE - PCSO
CNR: GJSR010009012025
Filing Number
25/2025
Filing Date
21-Jan-2025
Registration No
25/2025
Registration Date
21-Jan-2025
Court
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT SURAT
Judge
6-6th Addl District Judge
Decision Date
10-Apr-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL
Last updated 31-May-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
11210056242513
Police Station
DINDOLI POLICE STATION - SURAT DISTRICT
Year
2024
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Government of Gujarat
Adv. V L FALDU
Respondent(s)
-
1.ARJUN SANTOSH SUKHLAL AHIRE Advocate - D R RANA
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
10-Apr-2026
JudegementView PDF
Case Summary: POCSO Case No. 25/2025 Court: Special Fast-Track Court (POCSO), Surat, Gujarat Judge: Hon. Hiteshkumar Mukund Rai Vyas Date of Judgment: 10th April 2026 Decision The accused, Arjun Santosh Sukhlal Ahire, was acquitted of all charges under the Indian Penal Code 2023 (Sections 137(2), 87, 64, 64(2)(m), 64(2)(f)) and the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act 2012 (Sections 3(a), 4, 5(l), 5(n), 6, 12). Key Reasoning The court found that while the prosecution proved the victim was a minor (17 years 29 days old at the time of the alleged incident on 28/10/2024), it failed to establish beyond reasonable doubt that the accused committed sexual abuse or kidnapping. Critical gaps in the prosecution's case included: - The victim's own testimony contradicted the allegations of non-consensual sexual contact - Medical examination revealed no conclusive physical evidence of rape - The victim's parents could not corroborate the charge of kidnapping with force or fraud - Key circumstantial evidence (clothing examination, scientific reports) showed no corroborating physical evidence linking the accused to the alleged offenses The court applied the established principle that benefit of doubt must be given to the accused when primary facts cannot be conclusively proven beyond reasonable doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
10-Apr-2026
Disposed
6th Addl District Judge
-
01-Apr-2026
Judgement
6th Addl District Judge
-
17-Mar-2026
Further Statement
6th Addl District Judge
-
13-Mar-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
6th Addl District Judge
-
03-Mar-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
6th Addl District Judge
-
19-Feb-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
6th Addl District Judge
-
02-Feb-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
6th Addl District Judge
-
20-Jan-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
6th Addl District Judge
-
08-Jan-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
6th Addl District Judge
-
01-Jan-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
6th Addl District Judge
-
10-Dec-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
6th Addl District Judge
-
26-Nov-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
6th Addl District Judge
-
18-Nov-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
6th Addl District Judge
-
29-Oct-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
6th Addl District Judge
-
13-Oct-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
6th Addl District Judge
-
04-Oct-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
6th Addl District Judge
-
25-Sep-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
6th Addl District Judge
-
10-Sep-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
6th Addl District Judge
-
29-Aug-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
6th Addl District Judge
-
20-Aug-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
6th Addl District Judge
-
18-Aug-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
6th Addl District Judge
-
05-Aug-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
6th Addl District Judge
-
23-Jul-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
6th Addl District Judge
-
11-Jul-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
6th Addl District Judge
-
03-Jul-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
6th Addl District Judge
-
27-Jun-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
6th Addl District Judge
-
21-Jun-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
6th Addl District Judge
-
06-Jun-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
6th Addl District Judge
-
23-May-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
6th Addl District Judge
-
12-May-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
9th Addl District Judge
-
05-May-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
9th Addl District Judge
-
23-Apr-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
9th Addl District Judge
-
09-Apr-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
9th Addl District Judge
-
03-Apr-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
9th Addl District Judge
-
25-Mar-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
9th Addl District Judge
-
20-Mar-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
9th Addl District Judge
-
10-Mar-2025
Documentary Evidence
9th Addl District Judge
-
04-Mar-2025
Documentary Evidence
9th Addl District Judge
-
18-Feb-2025
Documentary Evidence
Addl.district & Sessions Judge
-
04-Feb-2025
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
21-Jan-2025
Case filed
Registration No. 25/2025
Case Summary: POCSO Case No. 25/2025 Court: Special Fast-Track Court (POCSO), Surat, Gujarat Judge: Hon. Hiteshkumar Mukund Rai Vyas Date of Judgment: 10th April 2026 Decision The accused, Arjun Santosh Sukhlal Ahire, was acquitted of all charges under the Indian Penal Code 2023 (Sections 137(2), 87, 64, 64(2)(m), 64(2)(f)) and the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act 2012 (Sections 3(a), 4, 5(l), 5(n), 6, 12). Key Reasoning The court found that while the prosecution proved the victim was a minor (17 years 29 days old at the time of the alleged incident on 28/10/2024), it failed to establish beyond reasonable doubt that the accused committed sexual abuse or kidnapping. Critical gaps in the prosecution's case included: - The victim's own testimony contradicted the allegations of non-consensual sexual contact - Medical examination revealed no conclusive physical evidence of rape - The victim's parents could not corroborate the charge of kidnapping with force or fraud - Key circumstantial evidence (clothing examination, scientific reports) showed no corroborating physical evidence linking the accused to the alleged offenses The court applied the established principle that benefit of doubt must be given to the accused when primary facts cannot be conclusively proven beyond reasonable doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts