ASHOKBHAI ALIAS TAKABHAI KANJIBHAI CHAUHAN vs STATE OF GUJARAT Advocate - M R PATEL — 51/2026

Case under The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 483. Disposed: Contested--REJECTED on 23rd March 2026.

Case disposed

CRMA S - CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION - SESSIONS

CNR: GJKH180002682026

Filing Number

51/2026

Filing Date

12-Mar-2026

Registration No

51/2026

Registration Date

12-Mar-2026

Court

Addl. District Court,Kapadvanj

Judge

1-Addl. District Judge

Decision Date

23-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--REJECTED

Last updated 11-Jun-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

11204027250640

Police Station

KATHLAL POLICE STATION - KHEDA DISTRICT

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 483

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.ASHOKBHAI ALIAS TAKABHAI KANJIBHAI CHAUHAN

    Adv. D P THAKOR

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF GUJARAT Advocate - M R PATEL

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 23-Mar-2026

    Order

    Summary of CRMA S No. 51/2026 The court rejected the criminal revision petition filed by Ashokbhai Takabhai Kanjibhai Chauhan seeking regular agricultural land under IPC Section 103(1). The petitioner's counsel argued that the accused was innocent with no criminal history and that there was insufficient evidence; however, the court found prima facie evidence of serious charges including causing death by pipe assault, inflicting grievous injuries, and violent altercation, making the case suitable for trial rather than quashing. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 23-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Addl. District Judge

  4. 18-Mar-2026

    Order

    Addl. District Judge

  5. 16-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 12-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 51/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary of CRMA S No. 51/2026 The court rejected the criminal revision petition filed by Ashokbhai Takabhai Kanjibhai Chauhan seeking regular agricultural land under IPC Section 103(1). The petitioner's counsel argued that the accused was innocent with no criminal history and that there was insufficient evidence; however, the court found prima facie evidence of serious charges including causing death by pipe assault, inflicting grievous injuries, and violent altercation, making the case suitable for trial rather than quashing. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case