L AND T COMANY VATI SURPALSINH G PARMAR vs MANUBHAI VIRSANGBHAI PATEL Advocate - B N GADHAVI — 23/2024
Case under The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 438,. Disposed: Contested--JUDGEMENT on 24th March 2026.
CR RA - CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION
CNR: GJSK180013172024
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
23/2024
Filing Date
15-10-2024
Registration No
23/2024
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)
MANUBHAI VIRSANGBHAI PATEL 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 court dismissed the criminal revision petition filed by L&T company representative Surpalsingh G. Parmar, who challenged the trial court's order canceling the bail of respondent Patel Manubhai (accused no. 1) in a criminal case involving charges under IPC sections 408, 409, 406, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, and 120-B. The court found the revision petition was filed beyond the 90-day statutory limitation prescribed under Article 131 of the Criminal Procedure Code, and therefore rejected it as time-barred without addressing the merits of the case. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The court dismissed the criminal revision petition filed by L&T company representative Surpalsingh G. Parmar, who challenged the trial court's order canceling the bail of respondent Patel Manubhai (accused no. 1) in a criminal case involving charges under IPC sections 408, 409, 406, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, and 120-B. The court found the revision petition was filed beyond the 90-day statutory limitation prescribed under Article 131 of the Criminal Procedure Code, and therefore rejected it as time-barred without addressing the merits of the case. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts