KARSHANBHAI MANSENGBHAI RAJPUT vs THE STATE OF GUJARAT Advocate - V A GANDHI — 145/2026

Case under The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 482,. Disposed: Contested--REJECTED on 12th March 2026.

CRMA S - CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION - SESSIONS

CNR: GJBK230004672026

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

145/2026

Filing Date

09-03-2026

Registration No

145/2026

Registration Date

09-03-2026

Court

ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT, THARAD

Judge

1-ADDL.DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE

Decision Date

12th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--REJECTED

FIR Details

FIR Number

11996005250242

Police Station

SUIGAM POLICE STATION - BANASKANTHA DISTRICT

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

THE BHARATIYA NAGARIK SURAKSHA SANHITA, 2023 Section 482,

Petitioner(s)

KARSHANBHAI MANSENGBHAI RAJPUT

Adv. A B RAJPUT

Respondent(s)

THE STATE OF GUJARAT Advocate - V A GANDHI

Hearing History

Judge: 1-ADDL.DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE

12-03-2026

Disposed

11-03-2026

HEARING

10-03-2026

HEARING

Final Orders / Judgements

12-03-2026
ORDER

Summary The Additional Sessions Judge at Tharad rejected the anticipatory bail application of Karshanbhai Mansengbhai Rajput in a Gujarat Prohibition Act case involving 3,744 bottles of illicit liquor valued at ₹10,10,448. The court found prima facie evidence of the applicant's active involvement as a business partner who coordinated the liquor trafficking through phone calls with the driver, noted his history as a habitual offender in 7 prior cases, and rejected his parity argument since he remained absconded for 4+ months unlike co-accused who were released. The court determined custodial interrogation was necessary and that bail release posed a flight risk and danger of reoffending. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The Additional Sessions Judge at Tharad rejected the anticipatory bail application of Karshanbhai Mansengbhai Rajput in a Gujarat Prohibition Act case involving 3,744 bottles of illicit liquor valued at ₹10,10,448. The court found prima facie evidence of the applicant's active involvement as a business partner who coordinated the liquor trafficking through phone calls with the driver, noted his history as a habitual offender in 7 prior cases, and rejected his parity argument since he remained absconded for 4+ months unlike co-accused who were released. The court determined custodial interrogation was necessary and that bail release posed a flight risk and danger of reoffending. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT, THARAD All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case