DILIPBHAI LALAJIBHAI SANKHAT vs Govt. of Gujarat Advocate - M K GOHEL — 52/2026

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

CRMA S - CRIMINAL MISC.APPLI - SESSIONS

CNR: GJGS030001232026

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

52/2026

Filing Date

28-02-2026

Registration No

52/2026

Registration Date

28-02-2026

Court

ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT, UNA

Judge

2-ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE

Decision Date

13th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--REJECTED

FIR Details

FIR Number

11186008260318

Police Station

UNA POLICE STATION - GIR SOMNATH DISTRICT

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

THE BHARATIYA NAGARIK SURAKSHA SANHITA, 2023 Section 483,

Petitioner(s)

DILIPBHAI LALAJIBHAI SANKHAT

Adv. H B JAMANI

Respondent(s)

Govt. of Gujarat Advocate - M K GOHEL

Hearing History

Judge: 2-ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE

13-03-2026

Disposed

11-03-2026

ORDER

10-03-2026

HEARING

09-03-2026

ORDER

07-03-2026

HEARING

Final Orders / Judgements

13-03-2026
ORDER

Court Summary The Additional Sessions Judge at Gir-Somnath rejected the bail application of Dilipbhai Laljibhai Sankhat, accused of rape and criminal intimidation under Sections 64(2)(m) and 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita. The court found prima facie evidence of serious charges involving repeated sexual assault, threat to circulate intimate photographs, and death threats spanning five months, coupled with the victim's credible corroborating statement before the magistrate. The court prioritized societal interest and women's safety over the accused's personal liberty. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Court Summary The Additional Sessions Judge at Gir-Somnath rejected the bail application of Dilipbhai Laljibhai Sankhat, accused of rape and criminal intimidation under Sections 64(2)(m) and 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita. The court found prima facie evidence of serious charges involving repeated sexual assault, threat to circulate intimate photographs, and death threats spanning five months, coupled with the victim's credible corroborating statement before the magistrate. The court prioritized societal interest and women's safety over the accused's personal liberty. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT, UNA All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case