SHRIBHAGWAN KUMAR YOGENDRA PRASAD vs Government of Gujarat — 1572/2026
Case under The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 483,. Disposed: Contested--REJECTED on 12th March 2026.
CRMA S - CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION - SESSIONS
CNR: GJSR010028372026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
1573/2026
Filing Date
02-03-2026
Registration No
1572/2026
Registration Date
02-03-2026
Court
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT SURAT
Judge
8-2nd ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE
Decision Date
12th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--REJECTED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
SHRIBHAGWAN KUMAR YOGENDRA PRASAD
Adv. S V VIRMANI
SURJEET KUMAR LAJJARAM
DIPAKKUMAR BIRENDRA SAH
Respondent(s)
Government of Gujarat
Hearing History
Judge: 8-2nd ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE
Disposed
ORDER
PROCESS TO RESPONDENTS
PROCESS TO RESPONDENTS
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 12-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 10-03-2026 | ORDER | |
| 06-03-2026 | PROCESS TO RESPONDENTS | |
| 05-03-2026 | PROCESS TO RESPONDENTS |
Final Orders / Judgements
The 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Surat rejected the bail application of three accused workers (Shribhagwan Kumar, Surjeet Kumar, and Dipakkumar Sah) charged with unlawful assembly, rioting, stone-pelting, and damage to public property during a violent incident at AM/NS India premises in Hazira. The court found that the serious nature of the allegations, ongoing investigation, and risk of evidence tampering justified denying bail at this stage, despite the applicants' claims of false implication and clean antecedents. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Surat rejected the bail application of three accused workers (Shribhagwan Kumar, Surjeet Kumar, and Dipakkumar Sah) charged with unlawful assembly, rioting, stone-pelting, and damage to public property during a violent incident at AM/NS India premises in Hazira. The court found that the serious nature of the allegations, ongoing investigation, and risk of evidence tampering justified denying bail at this stage, despite the applicants' claims of false implication and clean antecedents. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts