GIGABHAI VIJABHAI BHADARKA vs Government of Gujarat Advocate - AGP — 40/2026

Case under The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 482. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 16th March 2026.

Case disposed

CRMA S - CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION - SESSIONS

CNR: GJBN220001382026

Filing Number

40/2026

Filing Date

09-Mar-2026

Registration No

40/2026

Registration Date

09-Mar-2026

Court

ADDL COURT-TALAJA

Judge

1-Addl.district & Sessions Judge

Decision Date

16-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED

Last updated 31-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

26

Police Station

DATHA POLICE STATION - BHAVNAGAR DISTRICT

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 482

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.GIGABHAI VIJABHAI BHADARKA

    Adv. O J DAVE

  2. 2.HADAKIYA VELABHAI KAMABHAI

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Government of Gujarat Advocate - AGP

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 16-Mar-2026

    Order

    Case Summary: 40/2026 Court Decision: The court quashed the FIR against petitioners Gigabhai Vijabhai Bhadarka and Hadakiya Velabhai Kamabhai filed under IPC sections 308(5), 351(3), 54, and related provisions. The court found insufficient evidence of criminal wrongdoing and held that the allegations lacked credibility, noting procedural defects in the police investigation and lack of proper case documentation to warrant prosecution. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 16-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  4. 13-Mar-2026

    Order

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  5. 11-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 09-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 40/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: 40/2026 Court Decision: The court quashed the FIR against petitioners Gigabhai Vijabhai Bhadarka and Hadakiya Velabhai Kamabhai filed under IPC sections 308(5), 351(3), 54, and related provisions. The court found insufficient evidence of criminal wrongdoing and held that the allegations lacked credibility, noting procedural defects in the police investigation and lack of proper case documentation to warrant prosecution. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case