Government of Gujarat vs VIKRAMBHAI DUDABHAI ODEDARA Advocate - M J ZALA — 557/2026

Case under The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 223. Disposed: Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY on 14th March 2026.

Case disposed

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJJN020008582026

Filing Number

557/2026

Filing Date

19-Feb-2026

Registration No

557/2026

Registration Date

19-Feb-2026

Court

CIVIL COURT JUNAGADH

Judge

7-2nd Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.

Decision Date

14-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY

Last updated 27-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

11203004250651

Police Station

JUNAGADH C DIVISION POLICE STATION - JUNAGADH DISTRICT

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 223

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Government of Gujarat

    Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.VIKRAMBHAI DUDABHAI ODEDARA Advocate - M J ZALA

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

    The court convicted accused Vikrambhai Dudabhai Odedara under IPC Section 278 (creating public nuisance) for illegally storing railway sleepers at his residence and damaging a government official's boundary wall, sentencing him to a fine of Rs. 500 or 7 days imprisonment in default. The court rejected the accused's plea for leniency based on his poor financial condition and family responsibilities. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 14-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    2nd Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.

  4. 12-Mar-2026

    Process To Accused

    2nd Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.

  5. 19-Feb-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 19-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 557/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The court convicted accused Vikrambhai Dudabhai Odedara under IPC Section 278 (creating public nuisance) for illegally storing railway sleepers at his residence and damaging a government official's boundary wall, sentencing him to a fine of Rs. 500 or 7 days imprisonment in default. The court rejected the accused's plea for leniency based on his poor financial condition and family responsibilities. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case