KATHUBHAI BHOJBHAI KHACHAR vs Government of Gujarat Advocate - DGP — 146/2026

Case under Code of Criminal Procedure Section 408. Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 06th March 2026.

Case disposed

CRMA S - CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION - SESSIONS

CNR: GJSN010003072026

Filing Number

146/2026

Filing Date

09-Feb-2026

Registration No

146/2026

Registration Date

09-Feb-2026

Court

DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT SURENDRANAGAR

Judge

1-Principal District & Sessions Judge

Decision Date

06-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISMISSED

Last updated 15-Mar-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Criminal Procedure Section 408
Indian Penal Code Section 307,395,325,323,504,506(2),427
Gujarat (Bombay) Police Act, 1951 Section 135

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.KATHUBHAI BHOJBHAI KHACHAR

    Adv. P M DHRUVA

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Government of Gujarat Advocate - DGP

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 06-Mar-2026

    JudegementView PDF

    The Sessions Judge at Surendranagar dismissed the accused's application seeking transfer of Sessions Case No. 16/2015 from the 2nd Additional District & Sessions Judge to the Additional District & Sessions Judge at Limbdi. The court found the transfer request lacked merit and bona fides, noting that arguments had concluded 10 months prior, the request was made belatedly, and the original judge was retiring soon, making the accused's grounds appear opportunistic rather than genuine. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 06-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Principal District & Sessions Judge

  4. 05-Mar-2026

    Order

    Principal District & Sessions Judge

  5. 12-Feb-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 09-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 146/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The Sessions Judge at Surendranagar dismissed the accused's application seeking transfer of Sessions Case No. 16/2015 from the 2nd Additional District & Sessions Judge to the Additional District & Sessions Judge at Limbdi. The court found the transfer request lacked merit and bona fides, noting that arguments had concluded 10 months prior, the request was made belatedly, and the original judge was retiring soon, making the accused's grounds appear opportunistic rather than genuine. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case