MIHIR BIPINBHAI MOHANLAL SOLANKI vs THE STATE OF GUJARAT Advocate - P M TRIVEDI — 714/2026

Case under The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 483. Disposed: Contested--REJECTED on 13th March 2026.

CRMA S - CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION - SESSIONS

CNR: GJAH010018172026

Case disposed

Filing Number

714/2026

Filing Date

10-03-2026

Registration No

714/2026

Registration Date

10-03-2026

Court

Ahmedabad District

Judge

4-9th ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE

Decision Date

13th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--REJECTED

FIR Details

FIR Number

11191044250349

Police Station

GHATLODIA POLICE STATION- AHMEDABAD CITY

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

THE BHARATIYA NAGARIK SURAKSHA SANHITA, 2023 Section 483
THE BHARATIYA NYAYA SANHITA, 2023 Section 109(1),115(2),296(B),61,189(2),189(4),191(2),191(3),190

Petitioner(s)

MIHIR BIPINBHAI MOHANLAL SOLANKI

Adv. H M MADHU

Respondent(s)

THE STATE OF GUJARAT Advocate - P M TRIVEDI

Hearing History

Judge: 4-9th ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE

13-03-2026

Disposed

12-03-2026

PROCESS TO RESPONDENTS

Final Orders / Judgements

13-03-2026
ORDER

Case Summary: Mihir Bipinbhai Mohanlal Solanki v. State of Gujarat (Case 714/2026) The court rejected bail for accused Mihir Bipinbhai Mohanlal Solanki in an attempt to murder case under IPC Section 109(1). The court found that while co-accused were granted bail, Solanki's role as principal accused was more serious—he allegedly inflicted injuries with a stick and was the main conspirator. The court held that parity principle in bail cannot be mechanically applied when accused have different roles, and that granting bail would harm justice given the gravity of allegations and potential witness tampering. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: Mihir Bipinbhai Mohanlal Solanki v. State of Gujarat (Case 714/2026) The court rejected bail for accused Mihir Bipinbhai Mohanlal Solanki in an attempt to murder case under IPC Section 109(1). The court found that while co-accused were granted bail, Solanki's role as principal accused was more serious—he allegedly inflicted injuries with a stick and was the main conspirator. The court held that parity principle in bail cannot be mechanically applied when accused have different roles, and that granting bail would harm justice given the gravity of allegations and potential witness tampering. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

Ahmedabad District All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case