Government of Gujarat vs VIPUL GOPALBHAI MAHSARIYA — 1872/2023
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 279,427,. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 03rd April 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJSR170019542023
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
1874/2023
Filing Date
26-05-2023
Registration No
1872/2023
Registration Date
26-05-2023
Court
MUNICIPAL COURT, Surat
Judge
1-JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, FIRST CLASS (MUNI.)
Decision Date
03rd April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL
FIR Details
FIR Number
11210048230060
Police Station
UMRA POLICE STATION - SURAT DISTRICT
Year
2023
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Government of Gujarat
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
VIPUL GOPALBHAI MAHSARIYA
Hearing History
Judge: 1-JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, FIRST CLASS (MUNI.)
Disposed
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 03-04-2026 | Disposed | |
| 27-03-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION | |
| 25-03-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION | |
| 09-03-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION | |
| 10-02-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary The Metropolitan First Class Judicial Magistrate Court in Surat acquitted the accused Vipul Mehsariya of charges under IPC Sections 279 (rash/negligent driving) and 427 (causing mischief), and MV Act Sections 3 and 181, in a motor vehicle accident case. The court found that the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused was driving the vehicle at the time of the accident or that the driving was rash and negligent, as the complainant could not identify the actual person who caused the collision with his parked truck. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary The Metropolitan First Class Judicial Magistrate Court in Surat acquitted the accused Vipul Mehsariya of charges under IPC Sections 279 (rash/negligent driving) and 427 (causing mischief), and MV Act Sections 3 and 181, in a motor vehicle accident case. The court found that the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused was driving the vehicle at the time of the accident or that the driving was rash and negligent, as the complainant could not identify the actual person who caused the collision with his parked truck. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts