VIJAYBHAI DIPABHAI NANIYABHAI PALAS vs STATE OF GUJARAT Advocate - P R TIWARI — 275/2026
Case under Code of Criminal Procedure Section 439. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 17th March 2026.
CRMA S - CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION - SESSIONS
CNR: GJKH010014002026
Filing Number
275/2026
Filing Date
06-03-2026
Registration No
275/2026
Registration Date
06-03-2026
Court
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT NADIAD
Judge
1-PRINCIPAL DISTRICT JUDGE
Decision Date
17th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ALLOWED
FIR Details
FIR Number
11204017220217
Police Station
CHAKLASHI POLICE STATION - KHEDA DISTRICT
Year
2022
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
VIJAYBHAI DIPABHAI NANIYABHAI PALAS
Adv. G P CHAUHAN
Respondent(s)
STATE OF GUJARAT Advocate - P R TIWARI
Hearing History
Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL DISTRICT JUDGE
Disposed
HEARING
HEARING
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 17-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 16-03-2026 | HEARING |
| 11-03-2026 | HEARING |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: 275/2026 Petitioner: Vijaybhai Dipabhai Naniyabhai Palas Respondent: State of Gujarat Court Decision: The court granted bail to the accused on the following conditions: (1) surrender of passport, (2) regular court attendance during trial, (3) no tampering with witnesses or evidence, (4) residence within Gujarat, and (5) monthly police station reporting. The court imposed a bail bond of ₹15,000 with a surety of equal amount, finding that despite multiple theft charges, sufficient investigation had occurred and detention was not necessary. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: 275/2026 Petitioner: Vijaybhai Dipabhai Naniyabhai Palas Respondent: State of Gujarat Court Decision: The court granted bail to the accused on the following conditions: (1) surrender of passport, (2) regular court attendance during trial, (3) no tampering with witnesses or evidence, (4) residence within Gujarat, and (5) monthly police station reporting. The court imposed a bail bond of ₹15,000 with a surety of equal amount, finding that despite multiple theft charges, sufficient investigation had occurred and detention was not necessary. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts