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.

Case disposed

CRMA J - CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION - J

CNR: GJDH020023022026

Filing Number

610/2026

Filing Date

05-Mar-2026

Registration No

610/2026

Registration Date

05-Mar-2026

Court

CIVIL COURT DAHOD

Judge

1-Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

Decision Date

06-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED

Last updated 16-Mar-2026

Acts & Sections

The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 497

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.VIKASKUMAR DEVABHAI CHAUHAN HEIR OF DEVABHAI DITABHAI CHAUHAN

    Adv. A L PARMAR

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Government of Gujarat Advocate - APP (Assistant Public Prosecutor)

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 06-Mar-2026

    Judegement

    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.

  3. 06-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  4. 05-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 610/2026

casestatus.in Summary

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.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case