SEJALBEN JIGNESHBHAI SHAH vs Government of Gujarat Advocate - DGP — 269/2024
Case under The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 Section 29,12,18,19,20,21,22,. Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 06th March 2026.
CR A - CRIMINAL APPEAL
CNR: GJSN010026142024
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
269/2024
Filing Date
04-12-2024
Registration No
269/2024
Registration Date
04-12-2024
Court
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT SURENDRANAGAR
Judge
1-PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE
Decision Date
06th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISMISSED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
SEJALBEN JIGNESHBHAI SHAH
Adv. S A RAMANANDI
Respondent(s)
Government of Gujarat Advocate - DGP
MANJULABEN HIMMATLAL SHAH
Adv. N B LAKHATARIA
BHAVNABEN HIMMATLAL SHAH
Adv. N B LAKHATARIA
SANGITABEN HIMMATLAL SHAH W.O. RAJESHBHAI SANGHVI
Adv. N B LAKHATARIA
PRITIBEN HIMMATLAL SHAH W.O. KAUSHIKKUMAR MAHETA
Adv. N B LAKHATARIA
Hearing History
Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE
Disposed
JUDGEMENT
HEARING
HEARING
HEARING
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 06-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 18-02-2026 | JUDGEMENT | |
| 16-02-2026 | HEARING | |
| 20-01-2026 | HEARING | |
| 08-01-2026 | HEARING |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The Sessions Judge dismissed the appellant's appeal under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, confirming the trial court's finding that despite proving domestic violence, the appellant is not entitled to suitable accommodation or alternative rent under Section 19. The court found that the appellant owns a house in her own name with a monthly income of Rs. 89,172 and is paying a home loan EMI, demonstrating she has adequate alternative accommodation and is not in a destitute situation requiring the respondents' financial support. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The Sessions Judge dismissed the appellant's appeal under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, confirming the trial court's finding that despite proving domestic violence, the appellant is not entitled to suitable accommodation or alternative rent under Section 19. The court found that the appellant owns a house in her own name with a monthly income of Rs. 89,172 and is paying a home loan EMI, demonstrating she has adequate alternative accommodation and is not in a destitute situation requiring the respondents' financial support. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts