POLADI JAHIRKHAN USMANKHAN vs Government of Gujarat Advocate - J J BAROT — 19/2026

Case under The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 438. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 16th March 2026.

Case disposed

CR RA - CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION

CNR: GJPT010005242026

Filing Number

19/2026

Filing Date

05-Mar-2026

Registration No

19/2026

Registration Date

05-Mar-2026

Court

DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT PATAN

Judge

4-3rd Addl District Judge

Decision Date

16-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED

Last updated 16-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

11217030260120

Police Station

SIDHPUR POLICE STATION - PATAN DISTRICT

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 438

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.POLADI JAHIRKHAN USMANKHAN

    Adv. R B JOSHI

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Government of Gujarat Advocate - J J BAROT

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 16-Mar-2026

    JudegementView PDF

    Summary The court allowed the petitioner's revision application and overturned the lower court's order refusing to return a seized Maruti Suzuki Baleno car. The court held that since the vehicle's ownership was established to be the petitioner's, the vehicle was not essential for investigation, and prolonged police custody would cause deterioration; therefore, the vehicle should be returned to the petitioner on bail with specified conditions, including furnishing a bond equal to half the vehicle's assessed value and adhering to strict usage restrictions. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 16-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    3rd Addl District Judge

  4. 11-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  5. 05-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 19/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The court allowed the petitioner's revision application and overturned the lower court's order refusing to return a seized Maruti Suzuki Baleno car. The court held that since the vehicle's ownership was established to be the petitioner's, the vehicle was not essential for investigation, and prolonged police custody would cause deterioration; therefore, the vehicle should be returned to the petitioner on bail with specified conditions, including furnishing a bond equal to half the vehicle's assessed value and adhering to strict usage restrictions. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case