RAMESHBHAI ALIAS RANCHHO BAVAJI KESHAVBHAI SOLANKI vs THE STATE OF GUJARAT Advocate - P M TRIVEDI — 715/2026

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

CRMA S - CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION - SESSIONS

CNR: GJAH010018192026

Case disposed

Filing Number

715/2026

Filing Date

10-03-2026

Registration No

715/2026

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)

RAMESHBHAI ALIAS RANCHHO BAVAJI KESHAVBHAI 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

The court rejected the bail petition of Rameshbhai (alias Ranchho) Bavaji Keshavbhai Solanki in a case involving charges under IPC Section 143 for obtaining regular land. The court found that the accused's role was distinctly more serious than co-accused who were already granted bail—he held a knife to the victim's eye, struck with a rod, and caused injuries—and therefore parity principles did not require granting him bail. The court denied the petition, finding the severity of allegations, the accused's direct involvement in violence, and the need to prevent witness tampering outweighed bail considerations. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

The court rejected the bail petition of Rameshbhai (alias Ranchho) Bavaji Keshavbhai Solanki in a case involving charges under IPC Section 143 for obtaining regular land. The court found that the accused's role was distinctly more serious than co-accused who were already granted bail—he held a knife to the victim's eye, struck with a rod, and caused injuries—and therefore parity principles did not require granting him bail. The court denied the petition, finding the severity of allegations, the accused's direct involvement in violence, and the need to prevent witness tampering outweighed bail considerations. 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