PRUTHVIRAJSINH ALIAS RUSHIYO ALIAS RUSHIRAJSINH KARUBHA VADHER vs GOVERNMENT OF GUJARAT Advocate - APP — 41/2026

Case under The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 483. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 13th March 2026.

CRMA S - CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION - SESSIONS

CNR: GJDW080001672026

Case disposed

Filing Number

41/2026

Filing Date

10-03-2026

Registration No

41/2026

Registration Date

10-03-2026

Court

ADDL. COURT-DWARKA

Judge

1-ADDL.DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE

Decision Date

13th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED

FIR Details

FIR Number

11185005260218

Police Station

MITHAPUR POLICE STATION – DEVBHUMI DWARKA @ KHAMBHALIYA

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

THE BHARATIYA NAGARIK SURAKSHA SANHITA, 2023 Section 483

Petitioner(s)

PRUTHVIRAJSINH ALIAS RUSHIYO ALIAS RUSHIRAJSINH KARUBHA VADHER

Adv. J N PARMAR

Respondent(s)

GOVERNMENT OF GUJARAT Advocate - APP (Assistant Public Prosecutor)

Hearing History

Judge: 1-ADDL.DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE

13-03-2026

Disposed

12-03-2026

PROCESS TO RESPONDENTS

Final Orders / Judgements

13-03-2026
JUDEGEMENT

Case Summary: CrMA-41/2026 The court granted regular bail to Pruthvirajsinh Karubha Vadher, accused of offences under the Gujarat Prohibition Act, 1951 (Sections 65(E), 116-B, 98(2)). The judge found that custodial interrogation was unnecessary given the applicant's lack of serious criminal antecedents, strong family and social roots, and the nature of his alleged role in the offence. Bail was granted on stringent conditions including a personal bond of Rs. 25,000 with surety of equal amount, cooperation with investigation, passport deposit, regular court attendance, and prohibition on leaving India without court permission. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: CrMA-41/2026 The court granted regular bail to Pruthvirajsinh Karubha Vadher, accused of offences under the Gujarat Prohibition Act, 1951 (Sections 65(E), 116-B, 98(2)). The judge found that custodial interrogation was unnecessary given the applicant's lack of serious criminal antecedents, strong family and social roots, and the nature of his alleged role in the offence. Bail was granted on stringent conditions including a personal bond of Rs. 25,000 with surety of equal amount, cooperation with investigation, passport deposit, regular court attendance, and prohibition on leaving India without court permission. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

ADDL. COURT-DWARKA All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case