DHARMENDRAKUMAR ALIAS DHAMO VIJAYSINH NARVATSINH PARMAR vs STATE OF GUJARAT Advocate - D R BAROT — 276/2026

Case under Code of Criminal Procedure Section 439. Disposed: Contested--REJECTED on 17th March 2026.

Case disposed

CRMA S - CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION - SESSIONS

CNR: GJKH010014032026

Filing Number

276/2026

Filing Date

06-Mar-2026

Registration No

276/2026

Registration Date

06-Mar-2026

Court

DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT NADIAD

Judge

6-3rd Addl District Judge

Decision Date

17-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--REJECTED

Last updated 23-Apr-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

11204021250675

Police Station

DAKOR POLICE STATION - KHEDA DISTRICT

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

Code of Criminal Procedure Section 439
The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 483
The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 137(2),87,64(2)(m),65(1)
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 Section 3(a),4,5(L),6,18

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.DHARMENDRAKUMAR ALIAS DHAMO VIJAYSINH NARVATSINH PARMAR

    Adv. S S AMALIYAR

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF GUJARAT Advocate - D R BAROT

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 17-Mar-2026

    JudegementView PDF

    The court rejected the bail application of a 21-year-old accused charged with sexual assault against a 15-year-old minor under POCSO Act and BNS sections. The judge held that the gravity of the offense, the minor status of the victim, the accused's prima facie involvement, and societal interest warranted denial of bail, citing Supreme Court precedents that discretion should not favor accused in such heinous offenses. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 17-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    3rd Addl District Judge

  4. 13-Mar-2026

    Hearing

    3rd Addl District Judge

  5. 11-Mar-2026

    Hearing

    3rd Addl District Judge

  6. 09-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  7. 06-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 276/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The court rejected the bail application of a 21-year-old accused charged with sexual assault against a 15-year-old minor under POCSO Act and BNS sections. The judge held that the gravity of the offense, the minor status of the victim, the accused's prima facie involvement, and societal interest warranted denial of bail, citing Supreme Court precedents that discretion should not favor accused in such heinous offenses. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case