CHIRAG PRAKASHCHANDRA PANCHOLI vs THE STATE OF GUJARAT Advocate - J B RAJPUT — 264/2026
Case under The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 483,. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 10th March 2026.
CRMA S - CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION - SESSIONS
CNR: GJMH010007762026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
264/2026
Filing Date
05-03-2026
Registration No
264/2026
Registration Date
05-03-2026
Court
DISTRICT COURT MAHESANA
Judge
4-2nd ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE
Decision Date
10th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ALLOWED
FIR Details
FIR Number
11206050230344
Police Station
NANDASAN POLICE STATION - MAHESANA DISTRICT
Year
2023
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
CHIRAG PRAKASHCHANDRA PANCHOLI
Adv. P A VAGHELA
Respondent(s)
THE STATE OF GUJARAT Advocate - J B RAJPUT
Hearing History
Judge: 4-2nd ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE
Disposed
ORDER
HEARING
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 10-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 09-03-2026 | ORDER | |
| 07-03-2026 | HEARING |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The Mehsana Sessions Court granted regular bail to accused Chirag Prakashchandra Pancholi under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, setting a bail amount of Rs. 1,00,000 with an equal personal bond. The court considered that other co-accused in the same case (involving NDPS Act and IPC violations) had been granted bail by the Gujarat High Court, and found insufficient evidence of the accused's direct involvement in the crime scene. The court imposed strict conditions including residence restrictions, regular police reporting, passport submission, and non-interference with witnesses. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The Mehsana Sessions Court granted regular bail to accused Chirag Prakashchandra Pancholi under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, setting a bail amount of Rs. 1,00,000 with an equal personal bond. The court considered that other co-accused in the same case (involving NDPS Act and IPC violations) had been granted bail by the Gujarat High Court, and found insufficient evidence of the accused's direct involvement in the crime scene. The court imposed strict conditions including residence restrictions, regular police reporting, passport submission, and non-interference with witnesses. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts