L AND T COMANY VATI SURPALSINH G PARMAR vs RAJDIPSINH KISHORSINH PRATAPSINH CHAUHAN Advocate - B N GADHAVI — 22/2024
Case under The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 438,. Disposed: Contested--JUDGEMENT on 24th March 2026.
CR RA - CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION
CNR: GJSK180013162024
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
22/2024
Filing Date
15-10-2024
Registration No
22/2024
Registration Date
15-10-2024
Court
ADDL. DISTRICT COURT, IDAR
Judge
2-2nd ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE
Decision Date
24th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGEMENT
FIR Details
FIR Number
385
Police Station
IDAR POLICE STATION - SABARKANTHA DISTRICT
Year
2022
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
L AND T COMANY VATI SURPALSINH G PARMAR
Adv. R A GADHAVI
Respondent(s)
RAJDIPSINH KISHORSINH PRATAPSINH CHAUHAN Advocate - B N GADHAVI
THE STATE OF GUJARAT
Hearing History
Judge: 2-2nd ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE
Disposed
JUDGEMENT
FINAL HEARING
FINAL HEARING
FINAL HEARING
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 24-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 07-03-2026 | JUDGEMENT | |
| 21-02-2026 | FINAL HEARING | |
| 27-01-2026 | FINAL HEARING | |
| 06-01-2026 | FINAL HEARING |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The Gujarat High Court (Idar Sessions Division) dismissed a criminal revision petition filed by L&T Company employee Surpal Singh Parmar on March 24, 2026. The court rejected the plea seeking to set aside a trial court's order dated January 30, 2024, which had canceled the accused's bail, primarily on the ground that the revision petition was filed beyond the 90-day statutory limitation period prescribed under Article 131 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and no application for condonation of delay was submitted. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The Gujarat High Court (Idar Sessions Division) dismissed a criminal revision petition filed by L&T Company employee Surpal Singh Parmar on March 24, 2026. The court rejected the plea seeking to set aside a trial court's order dated January 30, 2024, which had canceled the accused's bail, primarily on the ground that the revision petition was filed beyond the 90-day statutory limitation period prescribed under Article 131 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and no application for condonation of delay was submitted. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts