DURGAPRASAD MOHANRAM CHOKHARAM JAT vs STATE OF GUJARAT Advocate - D R BAROT — 299/2026

Case under Code of Criminal Procedure Section 439. Disposed: Contested--REJECTED on 23rd March 2026.

CRMA S - CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION - SESSIONS

CNR: GJKH010015892026

Case disposed

Filing Number

299/2026

Filing Date

12-03-2026

Registration No

299/2026

Registration Date

12-03-2026

Court

DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT NADIAD

Judge

5-4th ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE

Decision Date

23rd March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--REJECTED

FIR Details

FIR Number

11204046260105

Police Station

NADIAD TOWN POLICE STATION - KHEDA DISTRICT

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 Section 439
THE BHARATIYA NAGARIK SURAKSHA SANHITA, 2023 Section 483
GUJARAT (BOMBAY) PROHIBITION ACT, 1949 Section 64(a),65(e),116-B,81,98(2)
THE BHARATIYA NYAYA SANHITA, 2023 Section 336(2),336(3),340(2)

Petitioner(s)

DURGAPRASAD MOHANRAM CHOKHARAM JAT

Adv. K B SONI

Respondent(s)

STATE OF GUJARAT Advocate - D R BAROT

Hearing History

Judge: 5-4th ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE

23-03-2026

Disposed

17-03-2026

ORDER

16-03-2026

HEARING

Final Orders / Judgements

23-03-2026
JUDEGEMENT

Case Summary: 299/2026 Court Decision: The court REJECTED the bail application of petitioner Durgaprasad Mohanram Chokharam Jat. The petitioner was accused of violating the Prohibition Act and BNS provisions related to illegal inter-state liquor smuggling. Despite arguments that the investigation was ongoing and the petitioner had no criminal history, the court found the charges serious and the investigation incomplete, with co-accused still at large. The court determined that granting bail could adversely affect the investigation and denied regular bail under CrPC Section 439. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: 299/2026 Court Decision: The court REJECTED the bail application of petitioner Durgaprasad Mohanram Chokharam Jat. The petitioner was accused of violating the Prohibition Act and BNS provisions related to illegal inter-state liquor smuggling. Despite arguments that the investigation was ongoing and the petitioner had no criminal history, the court found the charges serious and the investigation incomplete, with co-accused still at large. The court determined that granting bail could adversely affect the investigation and denied regular bail under CrPC Section 439. 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