NARESH RAMESH SANGTANI vs THE STATE OF GUJARAT THROUGH A.G.P Advocate - AGP — 170/2026
Case under The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 483. Disposed: Contested--REJECTED on 13th March 2026.
CRMA S - CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION - SESSIONS
CNR: GJKT150004602026
Filing Number
170/2026
Filing Date
09-03-2026
Registration No
170/2026
Registration Date
09-03-2026
Court
ADJ COURT, GANDHIDHAM
Judge
6-4th ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE
Decision Date
13th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--REJECTED
FIR Details
FIR Number
11993002240472
Police Station
ADIPUR POLICE STATION - KACHCHH DISTRICT
Year
2024
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
NARESH RAMESH SANGTANI
Adv. R T LALCHANDANI
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 |
|---|---|
| 13-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 12-03-2026 | ORDER |
| 11-03-2026 | SUMMONS - NOTICE |
Final Orders / Judgements
Court Decision Summary The Gujarat High Court (Gandhinagar) rejected the accused's petition and dismissed the bail application for temporary release from land-related criminal charges under IPC Sections 318(4), 61(2), 3(5) and IIT Act Section 66(1). The court found the accused's grounds for bail—claiming elderly parents requiring care and family financial hardship—insufficient, noting that family members could support the parents and that the accusations of property fraud were serious enough to warrant continued custody pending trial. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Court Decision Summary The Gujarat High Court (Gandhinagar) rejected the accused's petition and dismissed the bail application for temporary release from land-related criminal charges under IPC Sections 318(4), 61(2), 3(5) and IIT Act Section 66(1). The court found the accused's grounds for bail—claiming elderly parents requiring care and family financial hardship—insufficient, noting that family members could support the parents and that the accusations of property fraud were serious enough to warrant continued custody pending trial. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts