Conviction
ConcludedThe trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Gujarat High Court judgment.
The judgment of the Gujarat High Court records the following account. consider replacing victim name with role noun per R43. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.
This page documents a court-adjudicated case from the judgment and cited sources below. Findings are attributed to the court; this record does not add findings of its own.
How verification works →By judgment dated 9 January 2024 in R/Criminal Appeal Nos. 1472, 1276, 1343 and 1492 of 2019 with R/Criminal Appeal No. 1920 of 2019 (State), the Gujarat High Court (Coram: Ashutosh Shastri, Sandeep N. Bhatt, JJ.) affirmed the conviction of 7 police personnel, namely: Assistant Superintendent of Police (IPS), Jamnagar; Police Constable, Jamjodhpur; Police officer; Police Sub-Inspector, Dhrafa; Police personnel; Police personnel; Police Constable, Jamjodhpur.
Compiled from the judgment and the cited sources. Findings are those of the court; this card adds none of its own.
The Gujarat High Court judgment dated 9 January 2024 is the concluded position shown in the cited sources.
Reliable material supports a specifically documented fact relevant to that allegation, not necessarily the full allegation, causation, intent, unlawfulness, or responsibility.
Official finding: supports allegation.
Holding not recorded separately.
“We are of the view that prosecution has proved case against respective accused / convicts and hence, no interference is required in the impugned judgment and order passed by the Ld. Trail Court.” (para 24)
The trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Gujarat High Court judgment.
The Gujarat High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.
As of 29 April 2025, an appeal arising from this judgment was pending before the Supreme Court of India (officers: [name withheld], [name withheld], [name withheld] [name withheld], [name withheld], [name withheld], [name withheld], [name withheld]); the judgment's findings had not been set aside on that date.
(Round-8 full re-verification: published record re-checked against the judgment text (outcome, officers, quote, key facts) plus methodology-compliance pass; skills-guided adversarial re-verification of the published record against the judgment text (reverify/t1-*/adversarial-8.jsonl))
Corrections (0): No corrections recorded.
Review: Solo Staff combined review (one combined attestation) — not yet recorded.
These records are listed together because they share a state or a topic. That does not mean they are connected.