THAKOR ARJUNJI (AK) DIVANJI vs Government of Gujarat Advocate - A S MAKWANA — 143/2026
Case under The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 483. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 12th March 2026.
CRMA S
CNR: GJMH150003642026
Filing Number
143/2026
Filing Date
07-Mar-2026
Registration No
143/2026
Registration Date
07-Mar-2026
Court
ADDL. DISTRICT COURT, VISNAGAR
Judge
4-Addl. District Judge
Decision Date
12-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ALLOWED
Last updated 06-May-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
11206023250530
Police Station
KHERALU POLICE STATION- MEHSANA DISTRICT
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.THAKOR ARJUNJI (AK) DIVANJI
Adv. V B THAKOR
Respondent(s)
-
1.Government of Gujarat Advocate - A S MAKWANA
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
12-Mar-2026
JudegementView PDF
Summary The Additional Sessions Court, Mehsana, granted regular bail to the accused, Thakor Arjunji, in a case involving charges under IPC sections 109(1), 115(2), 351(3), 352, 54, and GP Act section 135 (relating to grievous hurt, criminal intimidation, and breach of a government order). The court found that the accused was a local resident with stable family ties and no criminal history, and that charging the accused after investigation did not justify continued detention, particularly since a co-accused received bail from the High Court under similar circumstances. The bail was granted on a bond of Rs. 25,000 with standard conditions including court appearance and non-interference with witnesses. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
12-Mar-2026
Disposed
Addl. District Judge
-
11-Mar-2026
Order
Addl. District Judge
-
10-Mar-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
07-Mar-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 143/2026
Summary The Additional Sessions Court, Mehsana, granted regular bail to the accused, Thakor Arjunji, in a case involving charges under IPC sections 109(1), 115(2), 351(3), 352, 54, and GP Act section 135 (relating to grievous hurt, criminal intimidation, and breach of a government order). The court found that the accused was a local resident with stable family ties and no criminal history, and that charging the accused after investigation did not justify continued detention, particularly since a co-accused received bail from the High Court under similar circumstances. The bail was granted on a bond of Rs. 25,000 with standard conditions including court appearance and non-interference with witnesses. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts