RAJESHBHAI CHHAGANBHAI CHAVADA vs THE STATE OF GUJARAT Advocate - V N MADHAK — 41/2026
Case under The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 483,. Disposed: Contested--REJECTED on 07th March 2026.
CRMA S - CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION - SESSIONS
CNR: GJJN200000672026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
41/2026
Filing Date
10-02-2026
Registration No
41/2026
Registration Date
10-02-2026
Court
Additional Court, Visavadar
Judge
1-4th ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE
Decision Date
07th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--REJECTED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
RAJESHBHAI CHHAGANBHAI CHAVADA
Adv. R B PARMAR
Respondent(s)
THE STATE OF GUJARAT Advocate - V N MADHAK
Hearing History
Judge: 1-4th ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE
Disposed
ORDER
HEARING
PROCESS TO RESPONDENTS
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 07-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 06-03-2026 | ORDER | |
| 18-02-2026 | HEARING | |
| 13-02-2026 | PROCESS TO RESPONDENTS |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: CRMA S/41/2026 The court rejected the bail petition of the accused in a criminal case involving serious charges under IPC Sections 143, 149, 325, 326, 354, and other provisions related to a violent assault resulting in death. The court found substantial evidence of premeditated attack using a motorcycle as a weapon, with the accused wielding an iron rod that caused fatal injuries. The court reasoned that releasing the accused would create danger to public safety and witnesses, and no exceptional circumstances existed to warrant bail given the heinous nature of the crime and strong prima facie case against the accused. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: CRMA S/41/2026 The court rejected the bail petition of the accused in a criminal case involving serious charges under IPC Sections 143, 149, 325, 326, 354, and other provisions related to a violent assault resulting in death. The court found substantial evidence of premeditated attack using a motorcycle as a weapon, with the accused wielding an iron rod that caused fatal injuries. The court reasoned that releasing the accused would create danger to public safety and witnesses, and no exceptional circumstances existed to warrant bail given the heinous nature of the crime and strong prima facie case against the accused. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts