JAYESHBHAI VINUBHAI CHAUDHARY vs STATE OF GUJARAT Advocate - PUBLIC PROSECUTOR( — CR.MA/12763/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 528. Disposed: --46-ANY OTHER MODE @ FH on 10th June 2026.
CNR: GJHC240406312026
Filing Number
CR.MA/23666/2026
Filing Date
04-Jun-2026
Registration No
CR.MA/12763/2026
Registration Date
05-Jun-2026
Judge
Honourable Mr.justice P. M. Raval
Coram
Honourable Mr.justice P. M. Raval
Bench Type
SINGLE
Category
900 - SJ - CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION - BHARATIYA NAGARIK SURAKSHA SANHITA, 2023 ( 900 )
Sub-Category
2 - SJ - CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION - BHARATIYA NAGARIK SURAKSHA SANHITA, 2023 - QUASHING OF COMPLAINT ( 2 )
Judicial Branch
JUDICIAL
Decision Date
10-Jun-2026
Nature of Disposal
--46-ANY OTHER MODE @ FH
Last updated 11-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.JAYESHBHAI VINUBHAI CHAUDHARY
Adv. MR MUNJAL V ACHARYA(
Respondent(s)
-
1.STATE OF GUJARAT Advocate - PUBLIC PROSECUTOR(
-
2.PANKAJBHAI @ LALO SURESHBHAI CHAUDHARY
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
10-Jun-2026
Honourable Mr. Justice Bhargav D. Karia,honourable Mr.justice P. M. RavalView PDF
The High Court of Gujarat quashed FIR CR No. 11213010240399 of 2024 registered against Jayeshbhai Vinubhai Chaudhary under Section 351(4) BNS (threatening behavior via WhatsApp) after the complainant filed an affidavit confirming amicable settlement of the personal dispute and stating no objection to quashing. The court held that continuing criminal proceedings would be futile and constitute abuse of process, as the case fell outside exempted categories requiring prosecution. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
10-Jun-2026
3600-Fresh Matters
Honourable Mrs. Justice M. K. Thakker
-
04-Jun-2026
Case filed
Registration No. CR.MA/12763/2026
The High Court of Gujarat quashed FIR CR No. 11213010240399 of 2024 registered against Jayeshbhai Vinubhai Chaudhary under Section 351(4) BNS (threatening behavior via WhatsApp) after the complainant filed an affidavit confirming amicable settlement of the personal dispute and stating no objection to quashing. The court held that continuing criminal proceedings would be futile and constitute abuse of process, as the case fell outside exempted categories requiring prosecution. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts