AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (AGAINST CONVICTION) NO. VIKRAMBHAI @PINTU LAKSHMANBHAI JESANGBHAI RAJPUT v. STATE OF GUJARAT
Case at a glance
Outcome
Allowed
Accordingly, this application is allowed
Provisions considered
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 ss. 114, 323, 341, 354, 354(A)(1)(i)
Judgment
========================================================== Appearance: MR MAULIN G PANDYA(3999) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MS. MAITHILI MEHT ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.N.RAY Date : 29/05/2026 ORAL ORDER The complainant Ushaben is present in Court and is identified by Mr. Mahesh Pujara learned advocate. It has been stated by learned advocate Mr. Maulin Pandya that the applicant has settled with complainant, and therefore, the case against him deserves to be closed. An order dated dated 08.05.2026 of a Coordinate Bench where the conviction passed under Sections 341, 354, 323 read with section 114 of the Indian Penal Code ( for short, ‘IPC’) has been set at rest by quashing the judgment of conviction. The present applicant has also been convicted for a period of two years for the offence punishable under Sections 354(A)(1) (i) of the IPC. On the affidavit-in-reply of the original complaint dated
28.05.2026 which is handed over in Court and taken on record, the judgment and order dated 07.05.2026 passed by the learned 6th Additional Sessions, Kheda at Nadiad in R/CR.RA/1534/2026 ORDER DATED: 29/05/2026 Criminal Appeal No. 614 of 2024 and further judgment
18.11.2024 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Mahudha in Criminal Case No. 275 of 2020 is quashed and set aside. Accordingly, this application is allowed. All the consequential proceedings qua the present applicant is also quashed and set aside. MARY VADAKKAN (D.N.RAY,J)
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Accordingly, this application is allowed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — ss. 114, 323, 341, 354, 354(A)(1)(i).
Which court decided this case, and when?
Gujarat High Court, on 29 May 2026. The bench was D N RAY.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.