KARAN BADALBHAI DABGIR vs GOVERNMENT OF GUJARAT Advocate - DGP — 637/2026
Case under The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 483. Disposed: Contested--REJECTED on 11th March 2026.
CRMA S - CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION - SESSIONS
CNR: GJRJ010016282026
Filing Number
637/2026
Filing Date
02-03-2026
Registration No
637/2026
Registration Date
02-03-2026
Court
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT RAJKOT
Judge
4-2nd ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE
Decision Date
11th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--REJECTED
FIR Details
FIR Number
11208035250093
Police Station
GANDHIGRAM POLICE STATION - RAJKOT DISTRICT
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
KARAN BADALBHAI DABGIR
Adv. H R BHAYANI
Respondent(s)
GOVERNMENT OF GUJARAT Advocate - DGP
ILABEN VANRAJBHAI RATHOD
Hearing History
Judge: 4-2nd ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE
Disposed
ORDER
ORDER
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 11-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 10-03-2026 | ORDER |
| 07-03-2026 | ORDER |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The Special Judge at Rajkot rejected the regular bail application of Karan Badalbhai Dabgir, accused of serious offences under the POCSO Act and BNS including alleged rape and child sexual abuse. The court found prima facie evidence of his involvement in the grave allegations—including forceful sexual intercourse with the complainant under threat of harming her children and sexual abuse of her 3-year-old daughter—and determined that granting bail would risk witness tampering and harassment of the complainant, especially given their proximity and that trial was at a crucial stage with no change in circumstances since previous bail rejections. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The Special Judge at Rajkot rejected the regular bail application of Karan Badalbhai Dabgir, accused of serious offences under the POCSO Act and BNS including alleged rape and child sexual abuse. The court found prima facie evidence of his involvement in the grave allegations—including forceful sexual intercourse with the complainant under threat of harming her children and sexual abuse of her 3-year-old daughter—and determined that granting bail would risk witness tampering and harassment of the complainant, especially given their proximity and that trial was at a crucial stage with no change in circumstances since previous bail rejections. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts