SHAIKH FIROZBHAI SHEKHCHAND vs Government of Gujarat Advocate - N L SUKHADWALA — 1972/2026
Case under The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 497. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 25th March 2026.
CRMA S - CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION - SESSIONS
CNR: GJSR010035042026
Filing Number
1973/2026
Filing Date
17-Mar-2026
Registration No
1972/2026
Registration Date
17-Mar-2026
Court
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT SURAT
Judge
1-Principal District & Sessions Judge
Decision Date
25-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ALLOWED
Last updated 05-Jul-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
1986
Police Station
GODADARA POLICE STATION - SURAT DISTRICT
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.SHAIKH FIROZBHAI SHEKHCHAND
Adv. R N BADGUJAR
Respondent(s)
-
1.Government of Gujarat Advocate - N L SUKHADWALA
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
25-Mar-2026
JudegementView PDF
CASE SUMMARY The Surat Sessions Court granted petitioner Shaikh Firozbhai Shekhchand's bail application under IPC Section 497, ordering release of his seized Vivo V50 mobile phone (IMEI 868185075253930) on specified conditions. The court found that the phone belongs to the petitioner, is essential for his legitimate purposes, and prolonged detention causes hardship; however, the device must be retained in its current condition and produced before the court whenever required during investigation proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
25-Mar-2026
Disposed
Principal District & Sessions Judge
-
24-Mar-2026
Hearing
Principal District & Sessions Judge
-
20-Mar-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
17-Mar-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 1972/2026
CASE SUMMARY The Surat Sessions Court granted petitioner Shaikh Firozbhai Shekhchand's bail application under IPC Section 497, ordering release of his seized Vivo V50 mobile phone (IMEI 868185075253930) on specified conditions. The court found that the phone belongs to the petitioner, is essential for his legitimate purposes, and prolonged detention causes hardship; however, the device must be retained in its current condition and produced before the court whenever required during investigation proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts