GOSAI BHAVIKABEN W.O.VIJAYGIRI vs VIJAYGIRI BABUGIRI GOSWAMI — 49/2026
Case under The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 100. Disposed: Contested--REJECTED on 10th April 2026.
CRMA J - CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATI- JMFC
CNR: GJGS040009122026
Filing Number
49/2026
Filing Date
28-02-2026
Registration No
49/2026
Registration Date
28-02-2026
Court
TALUKA COURT, UNA
Judge
2-2nd ADDL. SR. CIVIL JUDGE & A.C.J.M.
Decision Date
10th April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--REJECTED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
GOSAI BHAVIKABEN W.O.VIJAYGIRI
Adv. L J SOLANKI
Respondent(s)
VIJAYGIRI BABUGIRI GOSWAMI
Hearing History
Judge: 2-2nd ADDL. SR. CIVIL JUDGE & A.C.J.M.
Disposed
PROCESS TO ACCUSED
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 10-04-2026 | Disposed |
| 13-03-2026 | PROCESS TO ACCUSED |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary (CRMA 49/2026): The court dismissed the petitioner's application filed under BNS Section 100 seeking a search warrant against the respondent for the custody of her 2-year-old daughter. The respondent (father) submitted an affidavit confirming the child's custody is lawfully with him, that the parties were married on 10/02/2023, and he is properly caring for the child. The court held that since the child's custody lawfully rests with the father, it cannot be deemed illegal detention. While acknowledging that under the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act 1956 Section 6(a) the mother is the natural guardian of children under 5 years, the court noted it lacks jurisdiction to determine custody matters under Section 100. Consequently, the petition was dismissed as not falling within Section 100's purview. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary (CRMA 49/2026): The court dismissed the petitioner's application filed under BNS Section 100 seeking a search warrant against the respondent for the custody of her 2-year-old daughter. The respondent (father) submitted an affidavit confirming the child's custody is lawfully with him, that the parties were married on 10/02/2023, and he is properly caring for the child. The court held that since the child's custody lawfully rests with the father, it cannot be deemed illegal detention. While acknowledging that under the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act 1956 Section 6(a) the mother is the natural guardian of children under 5 years, the court noted it lacks jurisdiction to determine custody matters under Section 100. Consequently, the petition was dismissed as not falling within Section 100's purview. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts