GOTABHAI SOMABHAI RAVAL vs STATE OF GUJARAT Advocate - D R BAROT — 274/2026

Case under Code of Criminal Procedure Section 439,. Disposed: Contested--REJECTED on 12th March 2026.

CRMA S - CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION - SESSIONS

CNR: GJKH010013852026

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

274/2026

Filing Date

05-03-2026

Registration No

274/2026

Registration Date

05-03-2026

Court

DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT NADIAD

Judge

5-4th ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE

Decision Date

12th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--REJECTED

FIR Details

FIR Number

11204041260212

Police Station

MAHEMDAVAD POLICE STATION - KHEDA DISTRICT

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 Section 439,
THE BHARATIYA NAGARIK SURAKSHA SANHITA, 2023 Section 483,
THE BHARATIYA NYAYA SANHITA, 2023 Section 103(1),54,

Petitioner(s)

GOTABHAI SOMABHAI RAVAL

Adv. I K PARMAR

Respondent(s)

STATE OF GUJARAT Advocate - D R BAROT

Hearing History

Judge: 5-4th ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE

12-03-2026

Disposed

09-03-2026

ORDER

Final Orders / Judgements

12-03-2026
JUDEGEMENT

Court Decision Summary The Fourth Additional Sessions Court in Nadiad, Kheda District, rejected the regular bail application of Gotabhaikumar Somabhaikumar Rawel, accused in a murder case registered under BNS Section 103(1), P4 (corresponding to IPC Section 302). The court found the complainant's version suspicious due to inconsistencies (delayed FIR filing, lack of eyewitness details, unclear phone communication), but ultimately denied bail citing ongoing investigation, proximity of accused and complainant in the same village risking evidence tampering, and the serious nature of the offense. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Court Decision Summary The Fourth Additional Sessions Court in Nadiad, Kheda District, rejected the regular bail application of Gotabhaikumar Somabhaikumar Rawel, accused in a murder case registered under BNS Section 103(1), P4 (corresponding to IPC Section 302). The court found the complainant's version suspicious due to inconsistencies (delayed FIR filing, lack of eyewitness details, unclear phone communication), but ultimately denied bail citing ongoing investigation, proximity of accused and complainant in the same village risking evidence tampering, and the serious nature of the offense. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT NADIAD All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case