MANUBHAI GOGANBHAI MODHVADIA vs Government of Gujarat — 315/2026
Case under The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 483. Disposed: Contested--REJECTED on 01st April 2026.
CRMA S - CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION - SESSIONS
CNR: GJJM010008132026
Filing Number
315/2026
Filing Date
07-03-2026
Registration No
315/2026
Registration Date
07-03-2026
Court
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT JANMAGAR
Judge
15-4th ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE
Decision Date
01st April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--REJECTED
FIR Details
FIR Number
11202057250379
Police Station
SIKKA POLICE STATION - JAMNAGAR DISTRICT
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
MANUBHAI GOGANBHAI MODHVADIA
Adv. A H JOSHI
Respondent(s)
Government of Gujarat
Hearing History
Judge: 15-4th ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE
Disposed
ORDER
ORDER
ORDER
HEARING
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 01-04-2026 | Disposed |
| 30-03-2026 | ORDER |
| 27-03-2026 | ORDER |
| 23-03-2026 | ORDER |
| 20-03-2026 | HEARING |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: CRMA 315/2026 Manubhai Goganbhai Modhvadia, arrested for serious economic offences including forgery and document fraud under IPC sections 120(b), 406, 465-468, 471, 114, and SC/ST Atrocities Act provisions, sought 15 days temporary bail citing his wife's critical heart condition requiring coronary angiography. The court rejected the application, finding that Modhvadia's vital role in the alleged offence, criminal antecedents, and availability of four brothers and two sons to manage his wife's medical care rendered his personal presence unnecessary, despite acknowledging the medical emergency. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: CRMA 315/2026 Manubhai Goganbhai Modhvadia, arrested for serious economic offences including forgery and document fraud under IPC sections 120(b), 406, 465-468, 471, 114, and SC/ST Atrocities Act provisions, sought 15 days temporary bail citing his wife's critical heart condition requiring coronary angiography. The court rejected the application, finding that Modhvadia's vital role in the alleged offence, criminal antecedents, and availability of four brothers and two sons to manage his wife's medical care rendered his personal presence unnecessary, despite acknowledging the medical emergency. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts