AJITKUMAR SATYADEV RAY vs Government of Gujarat — 1539/2026

Case under The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 483,. Disposed: Contested--REJECTED on 09th March 2026.

CRMA S - CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION - SESSIONS

CNR: GJSR010027822026

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

1540/2026

Filing Date

02-03-2026

Registration No

1539/2026

Registration Date

02-03-2026

Court

DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT SURAT

Judge

6-6th ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE

Decision Date

09th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--REJECTED

FIR Details

FIR Number

5248

Police Station

PANDESARA POLICE STATION - SURAT DISTRICT

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

THE BHARATIYA NAGARIK SURAKSHA SANHITA, 2023 Section 483,
THE BHARATIYA NYAYA SANHITA, 2023 Section 137(2),87,64(2)(I),64(2)(M),65(1),
PROTECTION OF CHILDREN FROM SEXUAL OFFENCES ACT, 2012 Section 3(1),4(2),5(L),6,8,

Petitioner(s)

AJITKUMAR SATYADEV RAY

Adv. C V SHAH

Respondent(s)

Government of Gujarat

Hearing History

Judge: 6-6th ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE

09-03-2026

Disposed

05-03-2026

ORDER

Final Orders / Judgements

09-03-2026
JUDEGEMENT

Summary The 6th Additional Sessions Judge, Surat, rejected the bail application of 18-year-old Ajitkumar Satyadev Rai, who is accused of sexually abusing a minor girl below 14 years of age under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Protection of Children from Sexual Offenses Act, 2012. The court found prima facie evidence of serious charges including luring the victim under false marriage promises and taking her to Uttar Pradesh for repeated sexual assault, and held that bail at the investigation's crucial stage could obstruct fair investigation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The 6th Additional Sessions Judge, Surat, rejected the bail application of 18-year-old Ajitkumar Satyadev Rai, who is accused of sexually abusing a minor girl below 14 years of age under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Protection of Children from Sexual Offenses Act, 2012. The court found prima facie evidence of serious charges including luring the victim under false marriage promises and taking her to Uttar Pradesh for repeated sexual assault, and held that bail at the investigation's crucial stage could obstruct fair investigation. 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 SURAT All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case