RAJESH@RAJU@CHAKO@DATASAHEB NARENDRABHAI TRIVEDI vs Government of Gujarat Advocate - B.G.GUPTA -PP[1]-(G/PP) — 12/2023

Case under Code of Criminal Procedure Section 397. Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 23rd March 2026.

Case disposed

CR RA - CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION

CNR: GJNV010004022023

Filing Number

12/2023

Filing Date

03-Mar-2023

Registration No

12/2023

Registration Date

03-Mar-2023

Court

DISTRICT COURT, NAVSARI

Judge

3-Addl. District Judge

Decision Date

23-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISMISSED

Last updated 16-Apr-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

4

Police Station

ACB POLICE STATION - NAVSARI DISTRICT

Year

2014

Acts & Sections

Code of Criminal Procedure Section 397

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.RAJESH@RAJU@CHAKO@DATASAHEB NARENDRABHAI TRIVEDI

    Adv. V D NAIK

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Government of Gujarat Advocate - B.G.GUPTA -PP[1]-(G/PP)

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 23-Mar-2026

    JudegementView PDF

    Summary The Additional Sessions Judge of Navsari dismissed the accused's revision application challenging the trial court's rejection of his discharge petition under Section 239 CrPC. The court held that investigation revealed sufficient circumstantial evidence—including forged documents used to obtain a SIM card for making extortion calls—establishing a prima facie case against the applicant, and that detailed evidence evaluation is inappropriate at the discharge stage. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 23-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Addl. District Judge

  4. 16-Mar-2026

    Judgement

    Addl. District Judge

  5. 09-Mar-2026

    Final Hearing

    Addl. District Judge

  6. 02-Feb-2026

    Final Hearing

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  7. 22-Dec-2025

    Final Hearing

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  8. 10-Nov-2025

    Final Hearing

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  9. 06-Oct-2025

    Final Hearing

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  10. 01-Sep-2025

    Final Hearing

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  11. 25-Aug-2025

    Final Hearing

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  12. 01-Jul-2025

    Final Hearing

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  13. 20-May-2025

    Final Hearing

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  14. 07-Apr-2025

    Final Hearing

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  15. 24-Feb-2025

    Final Hearing

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  16. 21-Jan-2025

    Final Hearing

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  17. 03-Dec-2024

    Final Hearing

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  18. 05-Nov-2024

    Final Hearing

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  19. 24-Sep-2024

    Final Hearing

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  20. 07-Aug-2024

    Final Hearing

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  21. 24-Jun-2024

    Final Hearing

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  22. 13-May-2024

    Final Hearing

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  23. 03-Apr-2024

    Final Hearing

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  24. 20-Feb-2024

    Final Hearing

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  25. 15-Jan-2024

    Final Hearing

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  26. 06-Dec-2023

    Final Hearing

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  27. 23-Oct-2023

    Final Hearing

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  28. 13-Sep-2023

    Final Hearing

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  29. 02-Aug-2023

    Final Hearing

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  30. 26-Jun-2023

    Final Hearing

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  31. 15-May-2023

    Final Hearing

    Principal District & Sessions Judge

  32. 17-Apr-2023

    Final Hearing

    Principal District & Sessions Judge

  33. 28-Mar-2023

    Final Hearing

    Principal District & Sessions Judge

  34. 21-Mar-2023

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  35. 03-Mar-2023

    Case filed

    Registration No. 12/2023

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The Additional Sessions Judge of Navsari dismissed the accused's revision application challenging the trial court's rejection of his discharge petition under Section 239 CrPC. The court held that investigation revealed sufficient circumstantial evidence—including forged documents used to obtain a SIM card for making extortion calls—establishing a prima facie case against the applicant, and that detailed evidence evaluation is inappropriate at the discharge stage. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case