GOPALSINH SANGRAMSINH RATHOD vs THE STATE OF GUJARAT Advocate - P J SONI — 102/2026

Case under The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 482,. Disposed: Contested--JUDGEMENT on 11th March 2026.

CRMA S - CRIM MISC. APPLIC - SESSI

CNR: GJSK180002272026

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

102/2026

Filing Date

19-02-2026

Registration No

102/2026

Registration Date

19-02-2026

Court

ADDL. DISTRICT COURT, IDAR

Judge

1-3rd ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE

Decision Date

11th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--JUDGEMENT

FIR Details

FIR Number

39

Police Station

IDAR POLICE STATION - SABARKANTHA DISTRICT

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

THE BHARATIYA NAGARIK SURAKSHA SANHITA, 2023 Section 482,
GUJARAT (BOMBAY) PROHIBITION ACT, 1949 Section 65AE,,116B,98(2),81,83

Petitioner(s)

GOPALSINH SANGRAMSINH RATHOD

Adv. M D ZALA

Respondent(s)

THE STATE OF GUJARAT Advocate - P J SONI

Hearing History

Judge: 1-3rd ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE

11-03-2026

Disposed

10-03-2026

ORDER

09-03-2026

HEARING

07-03-2026

HEARING

03-03-2026

PROCESS TO RESPONDENTS

Final Orders / Judgements

11-03-2026
ORDER

Summary The court rejected the anticipatory bail application filed by Gopalsinh Sangramsinh Rathod under CrPC Section 438 in a case involving alleged violations of the Gujarat Prohibition Act. The court found that the applicant was accused of illegally possessing and transporting foreign liquor worth approximately ₹6.42 lakh, and that serious charges under the Prohibition Act sections warranted denial of bail to prevent obstruction of investigation and protect public order. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The court rejected the anticipatory bail application filed by Gopalsinh Sangramsinh Rathod under CrPC Section 438 in a case involving alleged violations of the Gujarat Prohibition Act. The court found that the applicant was accused of illegally possessing and transporting foreign liquor worth approximately ₹6.42 lakh, and that serious charges under the Prohibition Act sections warranted denial of bail to prevent obstruction of investigation and protect public order. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

ADDL. DISTRICT COURT, IDAR All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case