NISHABEN DHIRENBHAI KARIYA vs STATE OF GUJARAT SUMMONS THROUGH GOVERNMENT PLEADER Advocate - N K PUROHIT — 156/2026
Case under The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 482,. Disposed: Contested--REJECTED on 09th March 2026.
CRMA S - CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION - SESSIONS
CNR: GJJN010003782026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
156/2026
Filing Date
25-02-2026
Registration No
156/2026
Registration Date
25-02-2026
Court
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT JUNAGADH
Judge
13-5th ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE
Decision Date
09th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--REJECTED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
NISHABEN DHIRENBHAI KARIYA
Adv. J R JOSHI
Respondent(s)
STATE OF GUJARAT SUMMONS THROUGH GOVERNMENT PLEADER Advocate - N K PUROHIT
Hearing History
Judge: 13-5th ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE
Disposed
ORDER
ORDER
ORDER
ORDER
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 09-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 07-03-2026 | ORDER | |
| 06-03-2026 | ORDER | |
| 05-03-2026 | ORDER | |
| 03-03-2026 | ORDER |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The Gujarat High Court (CRMA No. 156-26) rejected anticipatory bail for the accused in a case involving SIM card fraud and illegal liquor dealings. The court found that the accused obtained SIM cards fraudulently using others' names and sold them to facilitate illegal activities. The court balanced individual liberty rights against public interest and investigative needs, ultimately denying bail due to the serious nature of the crimes, potential for evidence tampering, and risk of absconding. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The Gujarat High Court (CRMA No. 156-26) rejected anticipatory bail for the accused in a case involving SIM card fraud and illegal liquor dealings. The court found that the accused obtained SIM cards fraudulently using others' names and sold them to facilitate illegal activities. The court balanced individual liberty rights against public interest and investigative needs, ultimately denying bail due to the serious nature of the crimes, potential for evidence tampering, and risk of absconding. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts