BHALSINH JETUSINH VAGHELA vs Government of Gujarat Advocate - J S PATEL — 266/2026

Case under The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 483. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 16th March 2026.

Case disposed

CRMA S - CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION - SESSIONS

CNR: GJBK010010092026

Filing Number

266/2026

Filing Date

10-Mar-2026

Registration No

266/2026

Registration Date

10-Mar-2026

Court

DISTRICT COURT PALANPUR

Judge

5-3rd Addl District Judge

Decision Date

16-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED

Last updated 27-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

11195035251247

Police Station

PALANPUR TALUKA POLICE STATION - BANASKANTHA DISTRICT

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 483

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.BHALSINH JETUSINH VAGHELA

    Adv. V B RAMSENA

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Government of Gujarat Advocate - J S PATEL

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 16-Mar-2026

    JudegementView PDF

    The court approved bail for petitioner Bhalsinh Jetusinh Vaghela in a case involving charges under the Prohibition Act for allegedly transporting foreign liquor. The judge determined the petitioner's name did not appear in the FIR, he was merely a vehicle driver with no criminal history, and the investigation could proceed in his absence, warranting conditional bail of Rs. 25,000 with multiple conditions including regular court attendance and restrictions on leaving India. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 16-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    3rd Addl District Judge

  4. 13-Mar-2026

    Order

    3rd Addl District Judge

  5. 12-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 10-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 266/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The court approved bail for petitioner Bhalsinh Jetusinh Vaghela in a case involving charges under the Prohibition Act for allegedly transporting foreign liquor. The judge determined the petitioner's name did not appear in the FIR, he was merely a vehicle driver with no criminal history, and the investigation could proceed in his absence, warranting conditional bail of Rs. 25,000 with multiple conditions including regular court attendance and restrictions on leaving India. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case