SUNILKUMAR ALIAS MURGI DASHRATHBHAI BHALABHAI ANJANA PATEL vs STATE OF GUJARAT Advocate - D R BAROT — 285/2026
Case under Code of Criminal Procedure Section 439. Disposed: Contested--REJECTED on 16th March 2026.
CRMA S - CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION - SESSIONS
CNR: GJKH010015012026
Filing Number
285/2026
Filing Date
10-03-2026
Registration No
285/2026
Registration Date
10-03-2026
Court
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT NADIAD
Judge
6-3rd ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE
Decision Date
16th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--REJECTED
FIR Details
FIR Number
1120403926004
Police Station
MAHUDHA POLICE STATION - KHEDA DISTRICT
Year
2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
SUNILKUMAR ALIAS MURGI DASHRATHBHAI BHALABHAI ANJANA PATEL
Adv. A V PARMAR
Respondent(s)
STATE OF GUJARAT Advocate - D R BAROT
Hearing History
Judge: 6-3rd ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE
Disposed
HEARING
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 16-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 12-03-2026 | HEARING |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary of Case 285/2026 The 3rd Additional Sessions Court, Nadiad rejected the regular bail application of petitioner Sunilkumar alias Murgi Dashrathbhai Bhalabhai Anjana Patel in a case involving charges under the Prohibition Act and Indian Penal Code 2023 (sections related to contraband liquor trafficking). The court found that the petitioner had a central role in importing foreign liquor for sale, other accused remained absconding, and granting bail could facilitate witness intimidation and encourage similar antisocial activities. The court also noted the serious nature of drug-related crimes and their impact on society, finding no justification to release the accused on bail. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary of Case 285/2026 The 3rd Additional Sessions Court, Nadiad rejected the regular bail application of petitioner Sunilkumar alias Murgi Dashrathbhai Bhalabhai Anjana Patel in a case involving charges under the Prohibition Act and Indian Penal Code 2023 (sections related to contraband liquor trafficking). The court found that the petitioner had a central role in importing foreign liquor for sale, other accused remained absconding, and granting bail could facilitate witness intimidation and encourage similar antisocial activities. The court also noted the serious nature of drug-related crimes and their impact on society, finding no justification to release the accused on bail. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts