VILASBEN VISHNUBHAI CHUNARA vs THE STATE OF GUJARAT Advocate - P M TRIVEDI — 39/2026

Case under The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 438. Disposed: Contested--REJECTED on 12th March 2026.

Case disposed

CR RA - CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION

CNR: GJAH010012352026

Filing Number

39/2026

Filing Date

23-Feb-2026

Registration No

39/2026

Registration Date

23-Feb-2026

Court

Ahmedabad District

Judge

3-4th Addl District Judge

Decision Date

12-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--REJECTED

Last updated 15-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

11191048250780

Police Station

SARKHEJ POLICE STATION - AHMEDABAD DISTRICT

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 438
Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65(A),65(E),98(2),81

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.VILASBEN VISHNUBHAI CHUNARA

    Adv. B G RAJPUT

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.THE STATE OF GUJARAT Advocate - P M TRIVEDI

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 12-Mar-2026

    JudegementView PDF

    The High Court of Gujarat (Criminal Revision) quashed the trial court's order regarding a vehicle seized under the Gujarat Prohibition Act, 1949, holding that the seizure violated procedural requirements and the trial court lacked authority to release the vehicle. The court set aside the previous judgment and remitted the case with directions to follow proper legal procedure under Section 92(2) of the Prohibition Act regarding vehicle confiscation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 12-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    4th Addl District Judge

  4. 11-Mar-2026

    Process To Respondents

    4th Addl District Judge

  5. 09-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 23-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 39/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The High Court of Gujarat (Criminal Revision) quashed the trial court's order regarding a vehicle seized under the Gujarat Prohibition Act, 1949, holding that the seizure violated procedural requirements and the trial court lacked authority to release the vehicle. The court set aside the previous judgment and remitted the case with directions to follow proper legal procedure under Section 92(2) of the Prohibition Act regarding vehicle confiscation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case