RAUFBEG RAFIKBEG ALIAS KABHAIBHAI SARIFBEG MIRZA vs THE STATE OF GUJARAT — 28/2026

Case under The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 325,299,54. Disposed: Contested--REJECTED on 09th March 2026.

Case disposed

CRMA S - CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION - SESSIONS

CNR: GJAN120000862026

Filing Number

28/2026

Filing Date

02-Mar-2026

Registration No

28/2026

Registration Date

02-Mar-2026

Court

ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT - PETLAD

Judge

1-3rd Addl District Judge

Decision Date

09-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--REJECTED

Last updated 22-Mar-2026

Acts & Sections

The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 325,299,54
The Gujarat Animal Preservation (Amendment) Act, 2017 Section 5(1),6(B-1),8(1)(2)(3)(4)10
Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 Section 11(L)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.RAUFBEG RAFIKBEG ALIAS KABHAIBHAI SARIFBEG MIRZA

    Adv. M D MACKWANA

  2. 2.FAIYAZUDDIN ALIAS SAFIYUDIN SHERMAHMAD SHAIKH

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.THE STATE OF GUJARAT

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 09-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

    The court dismissed the bail application of two accused persons charged with offenses under the BNS (including causing hurt and criminal intimidation) and animal protection laws, finding the offenses serious in nature with adverse societal impact. The court rejected the defense arguments of innocence and cooperation, citing that investigation was incomplete and there was risk of evidence tampering if bail were granted. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 09-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    3rd Addl District Judge

  4. 06-Mar-2026

    Order

    3rd Addl District Judge

  5. 05-Mar-2026

    Hearing

    3rd Addl District Judge

  6. 02-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  7. 02-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 28/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The court dismissed the bail application of two accused persons charged with offenses under the BNS (including causing hurt and criminal intimidation) and animal protection laws, finding the offenses serious in nature with adverse societal impact. The court rejected the defense arguments of innocence and cooperation, citing that investigation was incomplete and there was risk of evidence tampering if bail were granted. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case