NITUKUMAR HARPALSING CHAUDHARI vs Government of Gujarat Advocate - V N MODI — 1529/2026
Case under The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 483. Disposed: Contested--REJECTED on 10th March 2026.
CRMA S - CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION - SESSIONS
CNR: GJSR010027662026
Filing Number
1531/2026
Filing Date
28-Feb-2026
Registration No
1529/2026
Registration Date
28-Feb-2026
Court
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT SURAT
Judge
7-4th Addl District Judge
Decision Date
10-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--REJECTED
Last updated 16-Apr-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
236
Police Station
KOSAMBA POLICE STATION - SURAT DISTRICT
Year
2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.NITUKUMAR HARPALSING CHAUDHARI
Adv. P H SOLANKI
Respondent(s)
-
1.Government of Gujarat Advocate - V N MODI
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
10-Mar-2026
Judegement
The court rejected the bail application filed by Nitukumar Harpalsing Chairy under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023. The accused was arrested in a case involving illegal foreign liquor (15,672 bottles worth ₹39,18,000) seized from a truck, with charges under IPC Sections 61(I), 81, 98(2), and 116(2). The court found that the investigation is ongoing with other accused still to be apprehended, and the accused posed a risk of tampering with evidence and absconding, warranting continued custody. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
10-Mar-2026
Disposed
4th Addl District Judge
-
09-Mar-2026
Order
4th Addl District Judge
-
05-Mar-2026
Process To Respondents
4th Addl District Judge
-
03-Mar-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
28-Feb-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 1529/2026
The court rejected the bail application filed by Nitukumar Harpalsing Chairy under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023. The accused was arrested in a case involving illegal foreign liquor (15,672 bottles worth ₹39,18,000) seized from a truck, with charges under IPC Sections 61(I), 81, 98(2), and 116(2). The court found that the investigation is ongoing with other accused still to be apprehended, and the accused posed a risk of tampering with evidence and absconding, warranting continued custody. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts