VIKASKUMAR DEVABHAI CHAUHAN HEIR OF DEVABHAI DITABHAI CHAUHAN vs Government of Gujarat Advocate - APP — 610/2026
Case under The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 497,. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 06th March 2026.
CRMA J - CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION - J
CNR: GJDH020023022026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
610/2026
Filing Date
05-03-2026
Registration No
610/2026
Registration Date
05-03-2026
Court
CIVIL COURT DAHOD
Judge
1-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDL. CJM
Decision Date
06th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ALLOWED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
VIKASKUMAR DEVABHAI CHAUHAN HEIR OF DEVABHAI DITABHAI CHAUHAN
Adv. A L PARMAR
Respondent(s)
Government of Gujarat Advocate - APP (Assistant Public Prosecutor)
Hearing History
Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDL. CJM
Disposed
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 06-03-2026 | Disposed |
Final Orders / Judgements
The court (CRMA 610/2026, Dahod) ordered the return of a Hero Honda Splendor Pro motorcycle seized from the accused, finding that the registered owner is the accused's father, not the accused himself. The court directed return of the vehicle to the accused subject to specified conditions under BNS Section 497, including a bond amount equal to the vehicle's value and restrictions on its unlawful use or transfer. The court reasoned that justice would be served by conditional release, as continued seizure would cause unnecessary hardship without further investigative benefit. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The court (CRMA 610/2026, Dahod) ordered the return of a Hero Honda Splendor Pro motorcycle seized from the accused, finding that the registered owner is the accused's father, not the accused himself. The court directed return of the vehicle to the accused subject to specified conditions under BNS Section 497, including a bond amount equal to the vehicle's value and restrictions on its unlawful use or transfer. The court reasoned that justice would be served by conditional release, as continued seizure would cause unnecessary hardship without further investigative benefit. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts