ATULBHAI PRAVINBHAI DHAKAN vs State of Gujarat Advocate - APP — 109/2026
Case under The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 483,. Disposed: Contested--REJECTED on 11th March 2026.
CRMA S - CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION
CNR: GJGS010003122026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
109/2026
Filing Date
06-03-2026
Registration No
109/2026
Registration Date
06-03-2026
Court
District Court, Veraval
Judge
2-ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE
Decision Date
11th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--REJECTED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
ATULBHAI PRAVINBHAI DHAKAN
Adv. M P DHOLIYA
BHARATBHAI PRAVINBHAI SONI
Adv. M P DHOLIYA
Respondent(s)
State of Gujarat Advocate - APP (Assistant Public Prosecutor)
Hearing History
Judge: 2-ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE
Disposed
ORDER
HEARING
SERVICE OF PROCESS
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 11-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 10-03-2026 | ORDER | |
| 09-03-2026 | HEARING | |
| 06-03-2026 | SERVICE OF PROCESS |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary: The Additional Sessions Court in Veraval (Gujarat) rejected the bail application filed by two accused persons (Atulbhai Pravinbhai Dhakar and Bhratbhai Pravinbhai Soni) under Section 483 of the BNSS. The court found sufficient evidence that the accused committed theft of gold ornaments worth approximately ₹1,10,000 from an Ambé Mata temple in Gorakhmadi village, with the stolen items recovered from their possession and identified by the complainant. The court denied bail, concluding the accused were habitual offenders likely to commit further crimes if released. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: The Additional Sessions Court in Veraval (Gujarat) rejected the bail application filed by two accused persons (Atulbhai Pravinbhai Dhakar and Bhratbhai Pravinbhai Soni) under Section 483 of the BNSS. The court found sufficient evidence that the accused committed theft of gold ornaments worth approximately ₹1,10,000 from an Ambé Mata temple in Gorakhmadi village, with the stolen items recovered from their possession and identified by the complainant. The court denied bail, concluding the accused were habitual offenders likely to commit further crimes if released. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts