PRAVINBHAI GOVINDBHAI PATEL vs Government of Gujarat Advocate - APP — 139/2023
Case under Code of Criminal Procedure Section 451,. Status: FINAL HEARING. Next hearing: 30th March 2026.
CRMA J - CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION - JMFC
CNR: GJGN030013612023
Next Hearing
30th March 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
139/2023
Filing Date
26-05-2023
Registration No
139/2023
Registration Date
26-05-2023
Court
TALUKA COURT, DEHGAM
Judge
1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
PRAVINBHAI GOVINDBHAI PATEL
Adv. N I JANI
Respondent(s)
Government of Gujarat Advocate - APP (Assistant Public Prosecutor)
Hearing History
Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.
FINAL HEARING
FINAL HEARING
FINAL HEARING
FINAL HEARING
FINAL HEARING
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 16-03-2026 | FINAL HEARING | |
| 06-03-2026 | FINAL HEARING | |
| 27-02-2026 | FINAL HEARING | |
| 20-02-2026 | FINAL HEARING | |
| 13-02-2026 | FINAL HEARING |
Interim Orders
Summary The court allowed the petition and directed that seized currency (Rs. 2,000 note) be deposited in a bank locker rather than handed to the accused. The court ordered the investigating officer to prepare a proper panchnama of the seized amount and deposit it with the court, following Supreme Court guidelines on custody of seized articles. The court also clarified that Rs. 25 lakh collected from various sources by the accused's associates should be returned to them as it belongs to them, not the petitioner. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The court allowed the petition and directed that seized currency (Rs. 2,000 note) be deposited in a bank locker rather than handed to the accused. The court ordered the investigating officer to prepare a proper panchnama of the seized amount and deposit it with the court, following Supreme Court guidelines on custody of seized articles. The court also clarified that Rs. 25 lakh collected from various sources by the accused's associates should be returned to them as it belongs to them, not the petitioner. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts