SURAJKUMAR NEKRAJ SHILARAM vs Government of Gujarat Advocate - DGP — 223/2026

Case under Code of Criminal Procedure Section 439,. Disposed: Contested--REJECTED on 06th March 2026.

CRMA S - CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION - SESSIONS

CNR: GJSN010004412026

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

223/2026

Filing Date

28-02-2026

Registration No

223/2026

Registration Date

28-02-2026

Court

DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT SURENDRANAGAR

Judge

3-6th ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE

Decision Date

06th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--REJECTED

Acts & Sections

CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 Section 439,
INDIAN PENAL CODE Section 302,
GUJARAT (BOMBAY) POLICE ACT, 1951 Section 135

Petitioner(s)

SURAJKUMAR NEKRAJ SHILARAM

Adv. T A VYAS

Respondent(s)

Government of Gujarat Advocate - DGP

Hearing History

Judge: 3-6th ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE

06-03-2026

Disposed

03-03-2026

HEARING

Final Orders / Judgements

06-03-2026
JUDEGEMENT

Court Decision Summary CRMA NO.223/2026 – Surendranagar Court The court rejected the accused's bail application for a 15-day temporary bail to undergo private hospital treatment for kidney stone surgery. The court found the accused's claim unjustified, noting that free government medical treatment was already available at U.N. Mehta Hospital in Ahmedabad where the accused was already undergoing treatment. The court held that an undertrial prisoner cannot select a particular doctor or private hospital and that adequate medical facilities were accessible within the city, making the bail plea baseless and the petition accordingly dismissed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Court Decision Summary CRMA NO.223/2026 – Surendranagar Court The court rejected the accused's bail application for a 15-day temporary bail to undergo private hospital treatment for kidney stone surgery. The court found the accused's claim unjustified, noting that free government medical treatment was already available at U.N. Mehta Hospital in Ahmedabad where the accused was already undergoing treatment. The court held that an undertrial prisoner cannot select a particular doctor or private hospital and that adequate medical facilities were accessible within the city, making the bail plea baseless and the petition accordingly dismissed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT SURENDRANAGAR All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case