SHENVA VISHALBHAI DINESHBHAI vs THE STATE Advocate - J C PATEL — 78/2026

Case under The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 497. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 23rd March 2026.

Case disposed

CRMA S - CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION - SESSIONS

CNR: GJAH240002732026

Filing Number

78/2026

Filing Date

26-Feb-2026

Registration No

78/2026

Registration Date

26-Feb-2026

Court

Addl. Court Dholka

Judge

1-Addl.district & Sessions Judge

Decision Date

23-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED

Last updated 16-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

11192020250461

Police Station

Dholka Town Police Station

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 497

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SHENVA VISHALBHAI DINESHBHAI

    Adv. T R JOSHI

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.THE STATE Advocate - J C PATEL

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 23-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

    The court allowed the application and ordered the return of the seized mobile phone to the applicant. The judge reasoned that since the criminal trial in the POCSO case had concluded with conviction, the applicant (who was not the accused) was the legitimate owner, and prolonged police custody would damage the electronic device, there was no further need to retain the muddamal article. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 23-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  4. 20-Mar-2026

    Order

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  5. 18-Mar-2026

    Order

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  6. 17-Mar-2026

    Order

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  7. 16-Mar-2026

    Order

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  8. 13-Mar-2026

    Order

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  9. 12-Mar-2026

    Order

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  10. 11-Mar-2026

    Order

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  11. 10-Mar-2026

    Order

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  12. 09-Mar-2026

    Order

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  13. 07-Mar-2026

    Order

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  14. 06-Mar-2026

    Order

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  15. 05-Mar-2026

    Order

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  16. 03-Mar-2026

    Hearing

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  17. 02-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  18. 26-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 78/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The court allowed the application and ordered the return of the seized mobile phone to the applicant. The judge reasoned that since the criminal trial in the POCSO case had concluded with conviction, the applicant (who was not the accused) was the legitimate owner, and prolonged police custody would damage the electronic device, there was no further need to retain the muddamal article. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case