HARJI MANJI BHUDIYA vs Government of Gujarat Advocate - APP — 509/2026
Case under The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 497. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 12th March 2026.
CRMA J - CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION - JMFC
CNR: GJKT020019282026
Filing Number
509/2026
Filing Date
05-Mar-2026
Registration No
509/2026
Registration Date
05-Mar-2026
Court
CIVIL COURT BHUJ
Judge
2-Chief Judicial Magistrate
Decision Date
12-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ALLOWED
Last updated 21-May-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
11205042260187
Police Station
BHUJ CITY A DIVISION POLICE STATION - KACHCHH DISTRICT
Year
2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.HARJI MANJI BHUDIYA
Adv. D R VAGHANI
Respondent(s)
-
1.Government of Gujarat Advocate - APP (Assistant Public Prosecutor)
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
12-Mar-2026
OrderView PDF
Summary The Chief Judicial Magistrate of Bhuj granted the applicant's petition for interim custody of seized property (including electronics, appliances, and hardware items valued at approximately ₹1.87 lakhs), which was stolen from the applicant's brother-in-law's house and recovered during a criminal investigation under BNS Section 303(2). The court ordered return of the goods to the applicant on condition of furnishing security bond, with strict conditions including prohibition on sale/transfer, production of items on court demand, and no alteration to the property's structure, relying on the Supreme Court's principle in *Sundarlal Ambalal Desai v. State of Gujarat* that seized property should not be unnecessarily kept in police custody. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
12-Mar-2026
Disposed
Chief Judicial Magistrate
-
11-Mar-2026
Hearing
Chief Judicial Magistrate
-
10-Mar-2026
Hearing
Chief Judicial Magistrate
-
09-Mar-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
05-Mar-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 509/2026
Summary The Chief Judicial Magistrate of Bhuj granted the applicant's petition for interim custody of seized property (including electronics, appliances, and hardware items valued at approximately ₹1.87 lakhs), which was stolen from the applicant's brother-in-law's house and recovered during a criminal investigation under BNS Section 303(2). The court ordered return of the goods to the applicant on condition of furnishing security bond, with strict conditions including prohibition on sale/transfer, production of items on court demand, and no alteration to the property's structure, relying on the Supreme Court's principle in *Sundarlal Ambalal Desai v. State of Gujarat* that seized property should not be unnecessarily kept in police custody. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts