Government of Gujarat vs SOHAN KANARAM GURJAR Advocate - V D MAISURIA — 3385/2025
Case under The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 281,125a,324(5). Disposed: Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY on 18th April 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJSR050040022025
Filing Number
3385/2025
Filing Date
12-11-2025
Registration No
3385/2025
Registration Date
12-11-2025
Court
TALUKA COURT, MANGROL
Judge
3-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDL. CJM
Decision Date
18th April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY
FIR Details
FIR Number
11214021250846
Police Station
KOSAMBA POLICE STATION - SURAT DISTRICT
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Government of Gujarat
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
SOHAN KANARAM GURJAR Advocate - V D MAISURIA
Hearing History
Judge: 3-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDL. CJM
Disposed
PROCESS TO ACCUSED
PROCESS TO ACCUSED
PROCESS TO ACCUSED
PROCESS TO ACCUSED
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 18-04-2026 | Disposed |
| 13-03-2026 | PROCESS TO ACCUSED |
| 05-02-2026 | PROCESS TO ACCUSED |
| 08-01-2026 | PROCESS TO ACCUSED |
| 17-12-2025 | PROCESS TO ACCUSED |
Final Orders / Judgements
The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate of Mangarol found the accused Sohan Kanaram Gurjar guilty under IPC sections 281, 125(a), and 324(5), and sentenced him to imprisonment until the end of the court proceedings plus a fine of ₹4,000, with one day of simple imprisonment as an alternative if the fine is not paid. The court imposed a reduced sentence below the statutory minimum based on the accused's voluntary confession, remorse, and assurance of future good conduct, applying the principle that courts may impose lenient punishment when sufficient grounds exist and the interests of justice warrant rehabilitation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate of Mangarol found the accused Sohan Kanaram Gurjar guilty under IPC sections 281, 125(a), and 324(5), and sentenced him to imprisonment until the end of the court proceedings plus a fine of ₹4,000, with one day of simple imprisonment as an alternative if the fine is not paid. The court imposed a reduced sentence below the statutory minimum based on the accused's voluntary confession, remorse, and assurance of future good conduct, applying the principle that courts may impose lenient punishment when sufficient grounds exist and the interests of justice warrant rehabilitation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts