BHARATPAL CHANDANSING RAJPUT vs Government of Gujarat — 1564/2026

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

Case disposed

CRMA S - CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION - SESSIONS

CNR: GJSR010028262026

Filing Number

1565/2026

Filing Date

02-Mar-2026

Registration No

1564/2026

Registration Date

02-Mar-2026

Court

DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT SURAT

Judge

6-6th Addl District Judge

Decision Date

09-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--REJECTED

Last updated 16-Apr-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

1816

Police Station

GODADARA POLICE STATION - SURAT DISTRICT

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 483
The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 74,75(1)(1),78(1)(1),351(1),351(3),54
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 Section 7,8

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.BHARATPAL CHANDANSING RAJPUT

    Adv. H S DEVARE

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Government of Gujarat

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 09-Mar-2026

    JudegementView PDF

    The Surat Additional Sessions Court denied the bail application of Bharatpal Chandansingh Rajput, accused of sexually assaulting a minor girl, finding a prima facie case against him based on serious allegations including attempted rape and penetrative sexual assault under POCSO Act provisions. The court determined that releasing him on bail posed risks of witness intimidation and flight from justice, especially since material witness evidence was still pending. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 09-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    6th Addl District Judge

  4. 05-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  5. 02-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 1564/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The Surat Additional Sessions Court denied the bail application of Bharatpal Chandansingh Rajput, accused of sexually assaulting a minor girl, finding a prima facie case against him based on serious allegations including attempted rape and penetrative sexual assault under POCSO Act provisions. The court determined that releasing him on bail posed risks of witness intimidation and flight from justice, especially since material witness evidence was still pending. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case