STATE OF GUJARAT vs DINESHBHAI S/OBASTIMAL KASTURCHAND LUHAR Advocate - R C VASAVA — 316/2024

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 380,457,114,. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 27th March 2026.

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJSR100003942024

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

316/2024

Filing Date

18-07-2024

Registration No

316/2024

Registration Date

18-07-2024

Court

TALUKA COURT, UMARPADA

Judge

1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C

Decision Date

27th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL

FIR Details

FIR Number

202

Police Station

UMARPADA POLICE STATION - SURAT DISTRICT

Year

2024

Acts & Sections

INDIAN PENAL CODE Section 380,457,114,
GUJARAT (BOMBAY) POLICE ACT, 1951 Section 135

Petitioner(s)

STATE OF GUJARAT

Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

DINESHBHAI S/OBASTIMAL KASTURCHAND LUHAR Advocate - R C VASAVA

Hearing History

Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C

27-03-2026

Disposed

11-03-2026

FINAL ARGUMENTS

09-03-2026

FURTHER STATEMENT

21-02-2026

FURTHER STATEMENT

05-02-2026

EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION

Final Orders / Judgements

27-03-2026
JUDEGEMENT

Court Decision Summary The Principal Civil Judge & JMFC, Umarpada (Surat) acquitted both accused in a theft case (FIR No. 316/2024) for lack of sufficient evidence. The court found that prosecution failed to establish the crime beyond reasonable doubt, as confessions made to police officers are inadmissible under Indian Evidence Act Section 25, and no independent corroborating evidence was produced to connect the accused to the alleged Rs. 3.8 lakh theft from a petrol pump. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Court Decision Summary The Principal Civil Judge & JMFC, Umarpada (Surat) acquitted both accused in a theft case (FIR No. 316/2024) for lack of sufficient evidence. The court found that prosecution failed to establish the crime beyond reasonable doubt, as confessions made to police officers are inadmissible under Indian Evidence Act Section 25, and no independent corroborating evidence was produced to connect the accused to the alleged Rs. 3.8 lakh theft from a petrol pump. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

TALUKA COURT, UMARPADA All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case