RAJAN NILESHBHAI DHOBI vs THE STATE OF GUJARAT Advocate - P M TRIVEDI — 726/2026
Case under The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 483. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 13th March 2026.
CRMA S - CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION - SESSIONS
CNR: GJAH010018552026
Filing Number
726/2026
Filing Date
11-03-2026
Registration No
726/2026
Registration Date
11-03-2026
Court
Ahmedabad District
Judge
4-9th ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE
Decision Date
13th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ALLOWED
FIR Details
FIR Number
11192050250796
Police Station
SANAND POLICE STATION - AHMEDABAD DISTRICT
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
RAJAN NILESHBHAI DHOBI
Adv. J S SOLANKI
Respondent(s)
THE STATE OF GUJARAT Advocate - P M TRIVEDI
Hearing History
Judge: 4-9th ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE
Disposed
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 13-03-2026 | Disposed |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: 726/2026 Court Decision: The court granted regular bail to petitioner Rajan Nileshbhai Dhobi in a Prohibition Act case (Sections 65(a)(i), 116(b), 98(2), 81) registered at Sanand Police Station. The petitioner was released on a personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000 and an equal amount as surety, subject to strict conditions including biweekly police station reporting, full cooperation with investigation, non-tampering with witnesses, and adherence to trial proceedings. Key Reasoning: The court found that while the investigation revealed seizure of liquor bottles and contraband, the severity of charges did not warrant continued custody. Imposing stringent bail conditions could effectively prevent flight risk and witness intimidation, making bail appropriate under established precedent principles. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: 726/2026 Court Decision: The court granted regular bail to petitioner Rajan Nileshbhai Dhobi in a Prohibition Act case (Sections 65(a)(i), 116(b), 98(2), 81) registered at Sanand Police Station. The petitioner was released on a personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000 and an equal amount as surety, subject to strict conditions including biweekly police station reporting, full cooperation with investigation, non-tampering with witnesses, and adherence to trial proceedings. Key Reasoning: The court found that while the investigation revealed seizure of liquor bottles and contraband, the severity of charges did not warrant continued custody. Imposing stringent bail conditions could effectively prevent flight risk and witness intimidation, making bail appropriate under established precedent principles. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts