MOHAMMADNAVAZ AMANULLA MORAGAL vs Government of Gujarat Advocate - D K PUROHIT — 212/2026
Case under The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 497,. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 03rd April 2026.
CRMA S - CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION - SESSIONS
CNR: GJBK010006942026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
212/2026
Filing Date
24-02-2026
Registration No
212/2026
Registration Date
24-02-2026
Court
DISTRICT COURT PALANPUR
Judge
5-3rd ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE
Decision Date
03rd April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ALLOWED
FIR Details
FIR Number
11195003240889
Police Station
AMIRGADH POLICE STATION - BANASKANTHA DISTRICT
Year
2024
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
MOHAMMADNAVAZ AMANULLA MORAGAL
Adv. D G VAISHNAV
Respondent(s)
Government of Gujarat Advocate - D K PUROHIT
Hearing History
Judge: 5-3rd ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE
Disposed
ORDER
HEARING
HEARING
HEARING
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 03-04-2026 | Disposed | |
| 02-04-2026 | ORDER | |
| 25-03-2026 | HEARING | |
| 16-03-2026 | HEARING | |
| 10-03-2026 | HEARING |
Final Orders / Judgements
Court Decision Summary The Third Additional Sessions Court in Palanpur partially granted the applicant's petition to recover an Apple iPhone 14 seized as evidence in a criminal case registered under NDPS Act sections 8(c), 20(b)(2), and 29. The court ordered release of the mobile phone on interim/temporary custody basis subject to strict conditions, including a bond of Rs. 29,170 (double the phone's value), data backup by a certified engineer, and affidavits ensuring the phone won't be misused or its data destroyed during trial proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Court Decision Summary The Third Additional Sessions Court in Palanpur partially granted the applicant's petition to recover an Apple iPhone 14 seized as evidence in a criminal case registered under NDPS Act sections 8(c), 20(b)(2), and 29. The court ordered release of the mobile phone on interim/temporary custody basis subject to strict conditions, including a bond of Rs. 29,170 (double the phone's value), data backup by a certified engineer, and affidavits ensuring the phone won't be misused or its data destroyed during trial proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts