MOTILAL RAMANAND SAH vs Government of Gujarat Advocate - S S PATIL — 1763/2026
Case under The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 483. Disposed: Contested--REJECTED on 13th March 2026.
CRMA S - CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION - SESSIONS
CNR: GJSR010031562026
Filing Number
1764/2026
Filing Date
09-03-2026
Registration No
1763/2026
Registration Date
09-03-2026
Court
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT SURAT
Judge
6-6th ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE
Decision Date
13th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--REJECTED
FIR Details
FIR Number
11210025231216
Police Station
LIMBAYAT POLICE STATION - SURAT DISTRICT
Year
2023
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
MOTILAL RAMANAND SAH
Adv. A K GUPTA
Respondent(s)
Government of Gujarat Advocate - S S PATIL
Hearing History
Judge: 6-6th ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE
Disposed
ORDER
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 13-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 11-03-2026 | ORDER |
Final Orders / Judgements
The 6th Additional Sessions Judge, Surat rejected Motilal Ramanand Shah's bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The court found a prima facie case against the 26-year-old accused, who allegedly lured a minor girl (under 14 years) into a fake marriage promise, kidnapped her to Gopalganj, Bihar, and repeatedly sexually assaulted her despite knowing her age. The court deemed bail inappropriate given the serious POCSO Act and IPC charges, pending witness testimony, and risks of witness intimidation or flight, as the accused is not a Surat resident. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The 6th Additional Sessions Judge, Surat rejected Motilal Ramanand Shah's bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The court found a prima facie case against the 26-year-old accused, who allegedly lured a minor girl (under 14 years) into a fake marriage promise, kidnapped her to Gopalganj, Bihar, and repeatedly sexually assaulted her despite knowing her age. The court deemed bail inappropriate given the serious POCSO Act and IPC charges, pending witness testimony, and risks of witness intimidation or flight, as the accused is not a Surat resident. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts