KANAIYA S/O. BHIMSHIBHAI GADHVI vs THE STATE OF GUJARAT THROUGH A.G.P Advocate - AGP — 148/2026
Case under The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 483(1)(B). Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 18th March 2026.
CRMA S - CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION - SESSIONS
CNR: GJKT150003602026
Filing Number
148/2026
Filing Date
28-02-2026
Registration No
148/2026
Registration Date
28-02-2026
Court
ADJ COURT, GANDHIDHAM
Judge
6-4th ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE
Decision Date
18th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ALLOWED
FIR Details
FIR Number
11994004260005
Police Station
GANDHIDHAM POLICE STATION - KACHCHH DISTRICT
Year
2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
KANAIYA S/O. BHIMSHIBHAI GADHVI
Adv. V N GADHAVI
Respondent(s)
THE STATE OF GUJARAT THROUGH A.G.P Advocate - AGP
Hearing History
Judge: 6-4th ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE
Disposed
ORDER
SUMMONS - NOTICE
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 18-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 17-03-2026 | ORDER |
| 11-03-2026 | SUMMONS - NOTICE |
Final Orders / Judgements
Court Decision Summary This Gujarat High Court judgment modified a lower court order regarding a military officer's service conditions. The court partially allowed the officer's petition, striking down Condition No. 7 that restricted him from leaving Gujarat state without government permission, while upholding other conditions requiring military cooperation and presence during trial proceedings. The court reasoned that while the officer must remain available for trial, an absolute territorial restriction on his movements by a single state was inappropriate given his status as an Indian Army serviceman who could be transferred to other states under military regulations. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Court Decision Summary This Gujarat High Court judgment modified a lower court order regarding a military officer's service conditions. The court partially allowed the officer's petition, striking down Condition No. 7 that restricted him from leaving Gujarat state without government permission, while upholding other conditions requiring military cooperation and presence during trial proceedings. The court reasoned that while the officer must remain available for trial, an absolute territorial restriction on his movements by a single state was inappropriate given his status as an Indian Army serviceman who could be transferred to other states under military regulations. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts