Government of Gujarat vs FAIZAN ALAM ISRAR ALAM SAIYAD Advocate - P V KEDARE — 80/2023

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 379(A)(3). Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 09th April 2026.

Case disposed

SC - SESSIONS CASE

CNR: GJSR010013652023

Filing Number

80/2023

Filing Date

27-Jan-2023

Registration No

80/2023

Registration Date

27-Jan-2023

Court

DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT SURAT

Judge

1-Principal District & Sessions Judge

Decision Date

09-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL

Last updated 16-Apr-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

11210002216509

Police Station

SACHIN G.I.D.C POLICE STATION - SURAT DISTRICT

Year

2021

Acts & Sections

Indian Penal Code Section 379(A)(3)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Government of Gujarat

    Adv. R P DOBARIYA

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.FAIZAN ALAM ISRAR ALAM SAIYAD Advocate - P V KEDARE

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 09-Apr-2026

    JudegementView PDF

    Summary The Gujarat District Court acquitted the accused (Faizan Alam Israr Alam Syed, age 21) charged under IPC Section 379(A)(3) for mobile phone theft on April 9, 2026. The court found insufficient evidence to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, as the prosecution failed to establish the accused's identity conclusively, lacked critical evidence like CCTV footage, and relied heavily on a single eyewitness whose testimony contained discrepancies regarding the accused's identification and vehicle registration details. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 09-Apr-2026

    Disposed

    Principal District & Sessions Judge

  4. 02-Apr-2026

    Judgement

    Principal District & Sessions Judge

  5. 25-Mar-2026

    Further Statement

    Principal District & Sessions Judge

  6. 09-Mar-2026

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal District & Sessions Judge

  7. 19-Feb-2026

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal District & Sessions Judge

  8. 06-Feb-2026

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal District & Sessions Judge

  9. 03-Feb-2026

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal District & Sessions Judge

  10. 29-Jan-2026

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal District & Sessions Judge

  11. 19-Dec-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    6th Addl District Judge

  12. 28-Oct-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    6th Addl District Judge

  13. 24-Sep-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    6th Addl District Judge

  14. 11-Aug-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    6th Addl District Judge

  15. 21-Jul-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    6th Addl District Judge

  16. 16-Jun-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    6th Addl District Judge

  17. 13-May-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    8th Addl District Judge

  18. 11-Apr-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    8th Addl District Judge

  19. 28-Feb-2025

    Documentary Evidence

    8th Addl District Judge

  20. 17-Jan-2025

    Documentary Evidence

    8th Addl District Judge

  21. 13-Dec-2024

    Documentary Evidence

    8th Addl District Judge

  22. 07-Nov-2024

    Documentary Evidence

    8th Addl District Judge

  23. 04-Oct-2024

    Documentary Evidence

    9th Addl District Judge

  24. 05-Sep-2024

    Documentary Evidence

    9th Addl District Judge

  25. 31-Jul-2024

    Documentary Evidence

    9th Addl District Judge

  26. 08-Jul-2024

    Documentary Evidence

    9th Addl District Judge

  27. 27-May-2024

    Documentary Evidence

    12th Addl District Judge

  28. 12-Feb-2024

    Documentary Evidence

    9th Addl District Judge

  29. 23-Oct-2023

    Documentary Evidence

    9th Addl District Judge

  30. 19-Jun-2023

    Documentary Evidence

    9th Addl District Judge

  31. 06-Mar-2023

    Documentary Evidence

    9th Addl District Judge

  32. 13-Feb-2023

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  33. 27-Jan-2023

    Case filed

    Registration No. 80/2023

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The Gujarat District Court acquitted the accused (Faizan Alam Israr Alam Syed, age 21) charged under IPC Section 379(A)(3) for mobile phone theft on April 9, 2026. The court found insufficient evidence to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, as the prosecution failed to establish the accused's identity conclusively, lacked critical evidence like CCTV footage, and relied heavily on a single eyewitness whose testimony contained discrepancies regarding the accused's identification and vehicle registration details. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case