Government of Gujarat vs SULTANALI BASHARAT ALI Advocate - D D BHARVAD, S D PARMAR — 3474/2025
Case under The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 281,125B,106(1),. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 11th March 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJSR090038972025
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
3481/2025
Filing Date
01-10-2025
Registration No
3474/2025
Registration Date
01-10-2025
Court
TALUKA COURT, PALSANA
Judge
1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Decision Date
11th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL
FIR Details
FIR Number
1398
Police Station
KADODARA GIDC POLICE STATION - SURAT DISTRICT
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Government of Gujarat
Adv. APP, H S INDAVE
Respondent(s)
SULTANALI BASHARAT ALI Advocate - D D BHARVAD, S D PARMAR
Hearing History
Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Disposed
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 11-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 09-03-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION | |
| 05-03-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION | |
| 12-02-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION | |
| 10-02-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION |
Final Orders / Judgements
Court Judgment Summary The Palsana Judicial Magistrate Court acquitted truck driver Sultanali Bharatalii of charges under IPC Sections 281, 125(B), 106(1), and MV Act Sections 177, 184, 134, 187 in a fatal accident case. The court found that prosecution witnesses did not directly observe the accident and lacked knowledge of which vehicle caused it, relying only on hearsay from police. Without eyewitness testimony establishing the accused's rash or negligent driving, the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, warranting acquittal. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Court Judgment Summary The Palsana Judicial Magistrate Court acquitted truck driver Sultanali Bharatalii of charges under IPC Sections 281, 125(B), 106(1), and MV Act Sections 177, 184, 134, 187 in a fatal accident case. The court found that prosecution witnesses did not directly observe the accident and lacked knowledge of which vehicle caused it, relying only on hearsay from police. Without eyewitness testimony establishing the accused's rash or negligent driving, the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, warranting acquittal. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts