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

Case disposed

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

THE BHARATIYA NAGARIK SURAKSHA SANHITA, 2023 Section 497,

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

06-03-2026

Disposed

Final Orders / Judgements

06-03-2026
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.

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.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

CIVIL COURT DAHOD All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case