R T VACHHANI

The Executive Engineer & Ors. appealed against Shashi Construction Co. & Anr. before the Gujarat High Court. The appellant, S.S.N.L., communicated its willingness to accept the lower court's judgment and requested a two‑month period to deposit the decretal amount. The court recorded this communication and, considering …

The appellant filed a suit for specific performance of a 2007 agreement to sell land, having paid part of the consideration. During the suit, several co‑owners (Defendants 3‑10) were deleted from the parties, and subsequent purchasers (Defendants 11‑12) were added. The trial court rejected the plaint under Order VII Ru…

The petitioners, Dinesh Kumar Shukkarbhai Patel, filed a series of miscellaneous and special civil applications, including a contempt application, against Shahmeena Husain, Chairman of the Gujarat Water Supply and Sewerage Board, and others. The petitioner’s counsel, Mr. Rajesh M. Chauhan, informed the court that the a…

The petitioners, Dinesh Kumar Patel, filed a series of miscellaneous and special civil applications, including a contempt application, against Shahmeena Husain, Chairman of the Gujarat Water Supply and Sewerage Board and others. The petitioner’s counsel, Mr. Rajesh M. Chauhan, informed the Court that the applications w…

The petitioners, Dinesh Kumar Shukkarbhai Patel, filed a series of miscellaneous and special civil applications, including a contempt application, against Shahmeena Husain, Chairman of the Gujarat Water Supply and Sewerage Board, and others. The petitioner’s counsel, Mr. Rajesh M. Chauhan, informed the court that the a…

The petitioners, Dinesh Kumar Patel, filed a series of miscellaneous and special civil applications, including a contempt application, against Shahmeena Husain, Chairman of the Gujarat Water Supply and Sewerage Board and others. The petitioner’s counsel, Mr. Rajesh M. Chauhan, informed the Court that the applications w…

The petitioners, Dinesh Kumar Shukkarbhai Patel, filed a series of miscellaneous and special civil applications, including a contempt application, against Shahmeena Husain, Chairman of the Gujarat Water Supply and Sewerage Board, and others. The petitioner’s counsel, Mr. Rajesh M. Chauhan, informed the court that the a…

The petitioners, Dinesh Kumar Shukkarbhai Patel, filed a series of miscellaneous and special civil applications, including a contempt application, against Shahmeena Husain, Chairman of the Gujarat Water Supply and Sewerage Board, and others. The petitioner’s counsel, Mr. Rajesh M. Chauhan, informed the court that the a…

The petitioners, Dinesh Kumar Patel, filed a series of miscellaneous and special civil applications, including a contempt application, against Shahmeena Husain, Chairman of the Gujarat Water Supply and Sewerage Board and others. The petitioner’s counsel, Mr. Rajesh M. Chauhan, informed the Court that the applications w…

The petitioners, Dinesh Kumar Shukkarbhai Patel, filed a series of miscellaneous and special civil applications, including a contempt application, against Shahmeena Husain, Chairman of the Gujarat Water Supply and Sewerage Board, and others. The petitioner’s counsel, Mr. Rajesh M. Chauhan, informed the court that the a…

The petitioners, Dinesh Kumar Shukkarbhai Patel, filed a series of miscellaneous and special civil applications, including a contempt application, against Shahmeena Husain, Chairman of the Gujarat Water Supply and Sewerage Board, and others. The petitioner’s counsel, Mr. Rajesh M. Chauhan, informed the court that the a…

The petitioners, Dinesh Kumar Shukkarbhai Patel, filed a series of miscellaneous and special civil applications, including a contempt application, against Shahmeena Husain, Chairman of the Gujarat Water Supply and Sewerage Board, and others. The petitioner’s counsel, Mr. Rajesh M. Chauhan, informed the court that the a…

The husband filed a divorce petition on the ground of cruelty, and the Family Court granted a decree of divorce. The wife appealed the decree before the Gujarat High Court. While the appeal was pending, the parties reached a settlement, with the husband paying Rs.18 lakhs as permanent alimony and the wife returning the…

The petitioners, Dinesh Kumar Patel, filed a series of miscellaneous and special civil applications, including a contempt application, against Shahmeena Husain, Chairman of the Gujarat Water Supply and Sewerage Board and others. The petitioner’s counsel, Mr. Rajesh M. Chauhan, informed the Court that the applications w…

The petitioners, Dinesh Kumar Shukkarbhai Patel, filed a series of miscellaneous and special civil applications, including a contempt application, against Shahmeena Husain, Chairman of the Gujarat Water Supply and Sewerage Board, and others. The petitioner’s counsel, Mr. Rajesh M. Chauhan, informed the court that the a…

The petitioners, Dinesh Kumar Shukkarbhai Patel, filed a series of miscellaneous and special civil applications, including a contempt application, against Shahmeena Husain, Chairman of the Gujarat Water Supply and Sewerage Board, and others. The petitioner’s counsel, Mr. Rajesh M. Chauhan, informed the court that the a…

The petitioners, Dinesh Kumar Shukkarbhai Patel, filed a series of miscellaneous and special civil applications, including a contempt application, against Shahmeena Husain, Chairman of the Gujarat Water Supply and Sewerage Board, and others. The petitioner’s counsel, Mr. Rajesh M. Chauhan, informed the court that the a…

The petitioners, Dinesh Kumar Shukkarbhai Patel, filed a series of miscellaneous and special civil applications, including a contempt application, against Shahmeena Husain, Chairman of the Gujarat Water Supply and Sewerage Board, and others. The petitioner’s counsel, Mr. Rajesh M. Chauhan, informed the court that the a…

The petitioners, Dinesh Kumar Shukkarbhai Patel, filed a series of miscellaneous and special civil applications, including a contempt application, against Shahmeena Husain, Chairman of the Gujarat Water Supply and Sewerage Board, and others. The petitioner’s counsel, Mr. Rajesh M. Chauhan, informed the court that the a…

The Union of India filed a first appeal (No.3151 of 2010) against Pratap Steels Rolling Mills Ltd. The appellants failed to appear before the High Court of Gujarat. The court noted the absence of counsel for the appellants and referred to its earlier order dated 20‑01‑2026. Relying on Order 41 Rule 17 of the Civil Proc…

The wife filed a family suit under the Family Courts Act and the Hindu Marriage Act seeking recovery of her streedhan, which included movable items and an open plot of land. The Family Court directed her to declare the total value of the claim and affix the appropriate court fee; she paid a nominal fee of Rs.40 but a d…

The First Appeal challenged a decree that granted the plaintiff a half share in two survey parcels and declared two registered sale deeds void. During the appeal, the original plaintiff and defendants 6‑8 executed a registered settlement agreement relinquishing the plaintiff’s rights over survey No. 36/1. The court exa…

Mahesh Govindbhai Patel filed a first appeal before the Gujarat High Court against Kantibhai @ Kantubhai Bhagubhai Patel and others. During the proceedings, the appellant's counsel submitted a withdrawal affidavit. The court recorded the withdrawal and disposed the appeal as withdrawn. Consequently, any interim relief …

The applicants filed Special Civil Suit No. 66 of 2010 which was dismissed by the Civil Court on merits without any evidence being taken, prompting a review petition that was also dismissed. They later filed a first appeal (F/FA/31316 of 2023) after a delay of 475‑484 days and sought condonation of this delay under Sec…

The appellant, a construction firm, claimed to have purchased agricultural land in 1985 and 1990 through agreements and irrevocable powers of attorney, and sought specific performance, declaration of a 2018 sale deed as void, and injunctions. The trial court dismissed the suit under Order VII Rule 11, holding it barred…

The State, represented by the Additional Special Land Acquisition Officer, appealed against a Reference Court award that granted an additional compensation of Rs 300 per square metre for land acquired for the Kalikua Irrigation Pond Canal, over the original award of Rs 6.90 per square metre. The appeal was filed under …

The appellant, Chetanben, filed a first appeal (No.166 of 2026) and a civil application for a stay concerning a property dispute that is already pending before the court in Civil Suit No.75 of 2022. The defendant, Dharmeshbhai Koradiya, submitted an affidavit assuring that he would not forcibly dispossess the appellant…

The State of Gujarat acquired land in Zampodar village under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, issuing a Section 4 notification in 1991 and a Section 6 notification in 1992. The Special Land Acquisition Officer awarded compensation based on rates for Bagayat and Jirayat land, but the appellants were dissatisfied and soug…

The appeal challenges a Land Acquisition Reference Court award of Rs.125 per square metre for land acquired for the Amreli‑Chittal bypass road. The original award ignored annual price appreciation since the base valuation year of 1993. The appellant argued that, following a prior decision (First Appeal No. 3175 of 2011…

The Special Land Acquisition Officer appealed under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 against an award by the Principal Civil Judge that granted the land owners additional compensation of Rs 300 per square metre, along with statutory solatium and interest. The acquiring body argued that the Reference Court e…

The Special Land Acquisition Officer appealed under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 against an award by the Principal Civil Judge that granted the land owners additional compensation of Rs 300 per square metre, along with statutory solatium and interest. The acquiring body argued that the Reference Court e…

The Special Land Acquisition Officer appealed under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 against an award by the Principal Civil Judge that granted the land owners additional compensation of Rs 300 per square metre, along with statutory solatium and interest. The acquiring body argued that the Reference Court e…

The Special Land Acquisition Officer appealed under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 against an award by the Principal Civil Judge that granted the land owners additional compensation of Rs 300 per square metre, along with statutory solatium and interest. The acquiring body argued that the Reference Court e…

The Special Land Acquisition Officer appealed under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 against an award by the Principal Civil Judge that granted the land owners additional compensation of Rs 300 per square metre, along with statutory solatium and interest. The acquiring body argued that the Reference Court e…

The Special Land Acquisition Officer appealed under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 against an award by the Principal Civil Judge that granted the land owners additional compensation of Rs 300 per square metre, along with statutory solatium and interest. The acquiring body argued that the Reference Court e…

The Special Land Acquisition Officer appealed under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 against an award by the Principal Civil Judge that granted the land owners additional compensation of Rs 300 per square metre, along with statutory solatium and interest. The acquiring body argued that the Reference Court e…

The appellants, Rafiquebhai Ismailbhai Galar & ors., filed a first appeal (No. 3604 of 2014) against Paschim Gujarat Vij Company Ltd & anr. The matter was listed as a critical old matter in the Gujarat High Court. When the case was called, the learned advocates for the appellants were not present to assist the Court. T…

The appellant, Preeti, appealed against a decree of divorce granted in favour of her husband, Vijay Charansingh Prajapati. The matter was referred to the High Court Mediation Centre, where a settlement was reached and recorded in a mediation report. The settlement included a clause wherein the appellant accepted the ju…

The appellants owned non‑agricultural residential land in Motipura, Himmatnagar, which was acquired for the Idar‑Vijapur bypass road. The Special Land Acquisition Officer initially awarded Rs.135 per square metre, which the Reference Court later increased by Rs.77.80 per square metre. Dissatisfied, the appellants appea…

The appellants owned non‑agricultural residential land in Motipura, Himmatnagar, which was acquired for the Idar‑Vijapur bypass road. The Special Land Acquisition Officer initially awarded Rs.135 per square metre, which the Reference Court later increased by Rs.77.80 per square metre. Dissatisfied, the appellants appea…

The appellant filed a first appeal (No. 1324 of 2007) against the respondents. During the hearing, the counsel for the appellant failed to remain present to assist the Court. The Court observed that no one had appeared to pursue the appeal for a long time, indicating a lack of interest in pursuing the matter on its mer…

Vismay Rajnikant Patel filed a Letters Patent Appeal (No. 421 of 2026) along with two civil applications for interim relief and withdrawal of the matter. While the proceedings were pending, Patel secured admission to the Mechanical Engineering program at NIT Tiruchirappalli in the general category. On this basis, his c…

The applicant, Prajapati Minaben Mohanbhai, filed an application seeking condonation of a 280‑day delay in preferring an appeal against Prajapati Mohanbhai Vajabhai. The court heard counsel for both parties and examined the reasons for the delay. It was held that the applicant had established sufficient cause for the d…

The appeal challenged an interim visitation order dated 11‑09‑2024 passed by the Family Court, Vadodara, which required the mother to meet the child in Vadodara. The mother argued that the arrangement was impractical and amounted to a paper order given the husband’s conduct. The father submitted that the pending main a…

The appellant, Amritaben Kiritkumar Chinubhai Bhasvar, filed a first appeal (No. 3098 of 2026) along with a civil application for stay. The appellant, through counsel Ms. Medha N. Pandya, indicated that she would not pursue the appeal and instead sought the Court's permission to pursue a divorce proceeding in accordanc…

The appellant, Pratham Sanjay Mahendru, filed a family suit seeking a declaration that his marriage was void under Section 12 of the Hindu Marriage Act. The Family Court dismissed the suit, finding that the appellant had not produced a marriage registration, witnesses, or any proof that the marriage was not solemnised …

Lt. Col. Iqbal Bahadur Dutt, the original appellant, filed a condonation of delay application seeking to excuse a 1,655‑day lapse in filing a motion for review/recall of an order dated 30‑07‑2021 passed in First Appeal No. 694 of 2019. The Court noted that the order had already been unsuccessfully challenged in a Speci…

The appeal challenges a trial court order that struck out the appellant's counter‑claim for lack of territorial jurisdiction and dismissed his application for interim injunction, while also allowing the plaintiff's application to reject the counter‑claim. The parties are heirs disputing shares in ancestral immovable pr…

Digvijay Cement Pvt Ltd filed a first appeal (No. 3112 of 2011) against Amrock Logistics & Trading Pvt Ltd in the Gujarat High Court. The appellant failed to appear before the Court despite being represented by counsel. The Court held that the appellant's non‑appearance amounted to a default. Accordingly, the appeal wa…

The appellants, grandparents, and the respondent, the mother, filed a first appeal and a civil application for stay concerning a dispute over the welfare of a child. Both parties appeared before the court and submitted sworn affidavits along with a notarized settlement agreement dated 17 July 2026. The court examined t…

The Jetpur Navagadh Nagarpalika appealed against an order that granted a higher pay‑scale (Rs 5,000‑8,000) to Yakub Musabhai Dosani, a municipal employee, arguing that his predecessors obtained the same benefit only after approaching the Tribunal and that Dosani had not done so, and that the claim was raised with delay…

The applicant filed a condonation of delay application in a civil suit but failed to appear before the court as the advocate representing the applicant was absent. The court noted the lack of prosecution and dismissed the application. The judges reserved liberty to file a fresh application if necessary. No substantive …

The High Court of Gujarat heard a first appeal filed by Shipra Ocean Trade Pvt Ltd against Green Gold Timber Pvt Ltd. The appellant's counsel was unable to provide information regarding the status of the appellant company when questioned by the bench. In the absence of such instruction, the Court exercised its powers u…

The petitioners, legal heirs of the deceased, filed applications seeking condonation of delay—1288 days for filing the main First Appeal and 132 days for filing an application to bring legal heirs. The court noted that similar relief had previously been granted in related proceedings. After hearing counsel, the court f…

The Municipal Commissioner of Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation appealed against a Single Judge’s order directing it to incorporate yearly increments and re‑fix the pension of Sushilaben Pandya, who was appointed as Assistant Nursing Tutor on a fixed‑salary probationary basis with a pay‑protection clause. Pandya argued t…

Babul Harivadanbhai Parikh filed a divorce suit which was withdrawn and later re‑filed, but the case was re‑numbered and a notice was sent to his former address where he no longer resided. The Family Court, relying on a bailiff’s report, dismissed the suit for default and later rejected the appellant’s application for …

The husband appealed a Family Court decree that granted him a divorce and ordered him to pay Rs.8,50,000 as permanent alimony under Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, despite the wife not having requested such relief. The appellant argued that the Family Court failed to frame the issue of permanent alimony and…

Bhanuben, the applicant, filed an application seeking condonation of an 11‑day delay in preferring a civil suit. The respondents opposed the condonation. The court examined the reasons provided by the applicant and found that sufficient cause was established for the delay. Consequently, the court held that the delay sh…

The marriage between Dinaben Lucasbhai Macwana and Daudbhai Benarbhai Chauhan, solemnized in 1976, produced six children. The husband filed a petition for dissolution of marriage under Sections 10(1‑7) and 10(1‑9) of the Divorce Act, 1879 on grounds of desertion; the wife did not appear and an ex‑parte decree of divorc…

Lok Prakashan Ltd filed two first appeals under Section 42 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, challenging an Appellate Tribunal order that had reversed a 2009 adjudicating authority decision. The appeals were listed as old matters and the appellant’s counsel withdrew, after which no appellant or counsel a…

Lok Prakashan Ltd filed two first appeals under Section 42 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, challenging an Appellate Tribunal order that had reversed a 2009 adjudicating authority decision. The appeals were listed as old matters and the appellant’s counsel withdrew, after which no appellant or counsel a…

The wife (applicant) filed a condonation of delay application seeking permission to file an appeal 308 days after the prescribed period. The husband (respondent) indicated that he would pay the permanent alimony within a month. The court heard counsel for both sides and examined the reasons for the delay. Finding that …

The appellants filed two first appeals under Section 96 of the Civil Procedure Code challenging orders that dismissed their plaints under Order 7 Rule 11. Both appeals were listed as old matters and the appellants, despite being served notice after their counsel retired, failed to appear before the court. The judges ob…

The appellants filed two first appeals under Section 96 of the Civil Procedure Code challenging orders that dismissed their plaints under Order 7 Rule 11. Both appeals were listed as old matters and the appellants, despite being served notice after their counsel retired, failed to appear before the court. The judges ob…

The appellant, Taraben Jigneshbhai Parmar, filed a first appeal (No. 5053 of 2023) against Jigneshbhai Punabhai Parmar. During the hearing, the appellant's counsel informed the Court that the parties had settled the dispute amicably and the appellant no longer wished to pursue the appeal. The appellant sought the Court…

The appellant husband appealed a Family Court order dismissing his petition for restitution of conjugal rights under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act. He claimed the wife had left the marital home without reasonable excuse after living together for seven years and having a child. The wife contested, asserting that t…

The applicants filed a civil application seeking leave to appeal a judgment and decree dated 17‑02‑2025 passed by the 2nd Additional Senior Civil Judge, Gandhinagar, in Special Civil Suit No.9 of 2019. The judgment rejected the plaint on the ground that the original plaintiff had executed an agreement to sell in favour…

The appellant, Tarunaben Miteshbhai Desai, filed a first appeal (No. 674 of 2022) seeking to join legal heirs to the suit. The respondent parties opposed the application. The Court examined whether the legal heir could be added as a party under the provisions of the Civil Procedure Code. It held that the prayer for joi…

Ketul S Shah & ors. filed a miscellaneous civil application for contempt against Chairman (Ms Ardra Agarwal) & ors. in the High Court of Gujarat. The applicant, through counsel, sought the court's permission to withdraw the contempt application. The court examined whether it could allow the withdrawal of such an applic…

The plaintiff filed a Special Civil Suit seeking specific performance of a contract concerning a disputed property. During the suit one defendant died, prompting the surviving defendant to apply for abatement of the suit, while the plaintiff applied to bring the deceased's legal heirs on record. The trial court, withou…

The appellant married the respondent in 2008 and, citing a customary practice of their Maisuriya Bhatia community, executed a notarized divorce deed in 2009. In 2025 the appellant filed a divorce suit in the Surat Family Court to obtain a judicial decree required for a US visa, but the court dismissed the suit on the g…

The appellant husband filed a divorce suit under Sections 13(1)(ia) and (ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, but the Family Court dismissed it on the ground that it was filed within one year of marriage, violating Section 14. The trial court, however, proceeded to examine merits such as cruelty and desertion, which the appe…

The appellant filed a first appeal (No. 972/2022) against a judgment dated 27 July 2021 in Special Civil Suit No. 52 of 2020, where the trial judge had dismissed the plaint under Order 7 Rule 11 of the CPC. The appeal was admitted on 31 March 2022, but the appellant’s counsel withdrew and the appellant did not appear w…

The Additional Special Land Acquisition Officer appealed against a Land Reference Court award that granted claimants an additional compensation of Rs 300 per square metre for land acquired for the Kali Kuva Irrigation Pond Canal project. The original award by the Special Land Acquisition Officer was Rs 69,000 per hecta…

The Additional Special Land Acquisition Officer appealed against a Land Reference Court award that granted claimants an additional compensation of Rs 300 per square metre for land acquired for the Kali Kuva Irrigation Pond Canal project. The original award by the Special Land Acquisition Officer was Rs 69,000 per hecta…

The Additional Special Land Acquisition Officer appealed against a Land Reference Court award that granted claimants an additional compensation of Rs 300 per square metre for land acquired for the Kali Kuva Irrigation Pond Canal project. The original award by the Special Land Acquisition Officer was Rs 69,000 per hecta…

The applicants, heirs of Ashok Manubhai Patel, filed a civil suit in 2020 for declaration, injunction, cancellation of a sale deed and specific performance, but the suit was dismissed because the advocate handling the case failed to pay the required court fees despite receiving full payment, leading to dismissal under …

The wife appealed under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 against a Family Court judgment that dismissed her petition for annulment of marriage on the ground that the Hindu marriage ceremony of ‘Saptapadi’ was not performed, and directed a police complaint for alleged false statements. The High Court examined w…

The wife appealed under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984, challenging the Family Court's order of interim maintenance of Rs.4,000 and Rs.2,000 per month granted under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The husband had obtained a decree of divorce on 8 May 2025, and the court also ordered permanent ali…

The Suart Municipal Corporation filed a civil application for condonation of delay against New India Assurance Company Ltd. and others. The applicant, through counsel Ms Jirga Jhaveri, sought permission to withdraw the pending application and requested liberty to file a fresh application before an appropriate bench. Th…

The appellant sought to challenge an order of enhanced maintenance passed by the Family Court. The respondent objected, invoking Section 19(4) of the Family Court Act, 1984, which bars appeals against maintenance orders under Chapter IX of the Criminal Procedure Code. The appellant counter‑claimed that Section 19(3) pe…

The husband filed a suit for dissolution of his marriage before the Family Court, Nadiad, which was dismissed by the Principal Judge. The husband appealed the dismissal under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984. The wife was served notice but did not appear. The appellant’s counsel requested that the matter be re…

The appellant, Goswami Bhagwangiri Punjgiri, filed First Appeal No. 248 of 2016 against the respondents, Chavda Hemuji Badarji & Ors. The appeal was listed before a division bench of Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ilesh J. Vora and Hon’ble Mr. Justice R. T. Vachhani. Counsel for the appellant (Mr. MJ Parikh, Ms. Dimple M. Parikh …

The husband appealed a judgment of the Family Court, Junagadh (Family Suit No.69 of 2013), which had dismissed his suit for a declaration of dissolution of marriage. The appeal was filed under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 and Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. Both parties subsequently reached a s…

The original plaintiff appealed the dismissal of a suit for partition of family property and accounts of joint family firms. The appeal had earlier been dismissed for non‑prosecution, was restored, but the appellants again failed to pursue it. No counsel appeared for the parties when the matter was called. The Court ob…

Krishnanben, daughter of Rambhai Jariya, filed a first appeal (No. 4304 of 2024) against Vijay Ranmalbai Garchar. The parties appeared before the Gujarat High Court, with counsel representing each side. The appellant requested that the appeal be withdrawn. The Court, per the common oral order dated 15 June 2026, dispos…

The applicant, Roshani @ Manisha Atulbhai Rajpur, filed an application before the Gujarat High Court seeking condonation of delay in preferring a civil suit. The court heard counsel for the parties and examined the reasons provided for the delay. Finding that the applicant had established sufficient cause for the delay…

The petitioner filed an application before the Gujarat High Court seeking condonation of delay in filing a civil suit. The court heard counsel for the parties and examined the reasons for the delay. It found that the petitioner had established sufficient cause for the lapse. Consequently, the court held that the delay …

Jamniben Lalji Dhila filed an application before the Gujarat High Court seeking condonation of delay in preferring a civil suit against Lalji Petha Dhila. The applicant argued that sufficient cause existed for the delay. The court heard counsel for the applicant and, after considering the averments, found that the appl…

The applicant filed an application before the Gujarat High Court seeking condonation of delay in filing a civil suit. The court heard counsel for both parties and examined the reasons for the delay. It was found that the applicant had established sufficient cause for the delay. Consequently, the court held that the del…

The applicant, Vishal Bhai Raju Bhai Patani (Dantimar), filed an application seeking condonation of delay in preferring a civil suit. The respondent, Divya Ben, opposed the application. Both parties were represented before a two‑judge bench of the Gujarat High Court. After hearing the counsel, the court found that the …

Lata Ben Tulsibhai Patel (GOTI) filed a civil application seeking condonation of delay in preferring a civil suit against Balubhai Nathubhai Patel and others. The respondents included several parties, some of whom were deceased, raising issues of representation by heirs. The applicant argued sufficient cause for the de…

The petitioner, Ajay Anant Gaurav, filed a civil application seeking condonation of delay in filing a suit. The respondent, Jagruti, opposed the application. The court examined the reasons for the delay presented by the petitioner. Finding that the petitioner had established sufficient cause for the delay, the court he…

The petitioners filed a civil application seeking condonation of delay in preferring a first appeal. The respondent highlighted that a related matter had already been granted condonation by the Coordinate Bench of the same court. After hearing both sides, the court found that the petitioners had established sufficient …

The petitioners filed a civil application seeking condonation of delay in preferring a first appeal. The respondent highlighted that a related matter had already been granted condonation by the Coordinate Bench of the same court. After hearing both sides, the court found that the petitioners had established sufficient …

The appellant, Nayanaben Bhupendrabhai, filed a first appeal against Bhupendrabhai Dhanrajbhai. During the pendency of the appeal, the parties reached an amicable settlement, and a settlement agreement was presented by the appellant's counsel. The court recorded the settlement agreement and considered the appellant's r…

The husband appealed a Family Court order that rejected his suit seeking a declaration that his marriage, registered on 13 June 2022 in Junagadh, be declared null and void. Both parties, now residing abroad (the husband in Canada and the wife in Cyprus), appeared virtually and submitted affidavits confirming a mutual s…

The applicant filed an application seeking condonation of a 123‑day delay in preferring a criminal appeal. The High Court examined the application and the accompanying office note. Counsel for the applicant argued that sufficient cause existed for the delay. After hearing both sides, the Court found that the applicant …

The appellant, a wife, filed an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 seeking condonation of a 105‑day delay in filing an appeal against a Family Court decree of divorce dated 13‑05‑2025. The respondent argued that the delay was not due to genuine financial hardship, citing the appellant’s earlier fil…

The Family Court in Ahmedabad dismissed a suit filed by the wife seeking a declaration of marital status. The wife appealed to the Gujarat High Court under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure read with Section 19 of the Family Court Act. During the hearing, both parties informed the Court that they had reached a …

Bhilosa Industries Pvt. Ltd. filed an Admiralty suit against MV Al Wathbha (IMO No. 9852743) and others. The plaintiff's counsel, Mr. Manav A. Mehta, informed the court that the vessel had left the territorial jurisdiction, rendering the suit infructuous. He sought the court's permission to withdraw the suit and submit…

The plaintiff, National Chemical Carriers Company Ltd., filed an admiralty suit seeking the arrest of the defendant vessel UACC Marah. The court ordered the vessel's arrest on 3 April 2026. The parties subsequently reached an amicable settlement on 22 May 2026, agreeing to withdraw the suit. The plaintiff moved for the…

Petitioners Raval Kalpesh Mahendrabhai and another filed a Special Civil Application challenging an order dated 14 May 2026 issued by the concerned authority. The authority subsequently withdrew that order and the accompanying communications. The High Court directed that a fresh notice be issued to the petitioners and …

The legal heirs of the deceased Chhanaji Ramtuji filed a special civil application seeking a writ of mandamus to quash an order dated 11 May 2026 issued by the Deputy Collector (Land Reforms) in Ganot Appeal Case No. 123 of 2024. The petitioners argued that the order was vitiated by procedural delay. The respondents, i…

The appellant, Mohmad AbdulKadir Usmani, appealed against an order dated 23 April 2026 passed by the 2nd Additional Civil Judge, Panchmahals, in Regular Civil Suit No.40 of 2026. The appellant argued that the order, recorded as Ex.7, should be set aside. The High Court, noting that the parties had reached a consensus t…

Gujarat State Electricity Corporation Ltd. and another filed a Letters Patent Appeal (No. 418 of 2026) connected with a Special Civil Application (No. 7486 of 2026). The respondents, Mukeshkumar Nathalal Bhut and others, indicated they were ready to withdraw the Special Civil Application, reserving the right to approac…

The petitioner, Sangram Rakesh Singh Sikarvar, filed a criminal application seeking permission to withdraw the petition after the bail applications were withdrawn. The petitioner requested liberty to file a fresh petition on the same cause of action. The Court considered whether it could allow such a withdrawal and gra…

Upesh @ Kano Shantibhai Sarvaiya was preventively detained on 24-04-2026 under the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985 as a "dangerous person" based on two pending IPC cases. He challenged the order, arguing that the alleged offences pertained only to law and order and did not affect public order as …

Hiren, a bootlegger, was preventively detained on 24‑04‑2026 under the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985. He challenged the detention, arguing that the alleged offences under the Prohibition Act (sections 65(E), 116(B), 81) pertained only to law and order, not public order as required by Section 3(…

Dharmendra @ Lalo Sampatsinh Chauhan was preventively detained on 25‑04‑2026 under the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985 as a bootlegger. He challenged the order, arguing that his alleged offences under the Prohibition Act and BNS affect only law and order, not public order. The State contended tha…

Palkesh @ Palli Kishanchand Dhamecha was preventively detained on 25‑04‑2026 by the Police Commissioner, Vadodara, under the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985 as a bootlegger. He challenged the detention, arguing that his alleged offences under the Prohibition Act and the BNS Act pertained only to …

Girish @ Giri Sevakram Pahelwani was preventively detained on 25‑04‑2026 under the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985 as a bootlegger. He challenged the detention, arguing that the alleged offences under the Prohibition Act and BNS pertained only to law and order, not to public order as required by …

Vikramsinh Diwansinh was preventively detained on 25‑04‑2026 under the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985 as a bootlegger. He challenged the detention, arguing that the alleged offences under the Prohibition Act and BNS did not affect public order, only law and order. The State contended that his ha…

Arjunbhai Bhimabhai Bharai was preventively detained on 24‑04‑2026 by the District Magistrate, Rajkot, under the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985 as a bootlegger. He challenged the detention, arguing that the alleged offences under the Prohibition Act pertained only to law and order and did not af…

The petitioner, Raish @Pandu, challenged his preventive detention order dated 13/04/2026 issued under the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985, on the ground that he was not a "dangerous person" as defined by the Act. The petitioner argued that the alleged offences related only to law and order and di…

Rahul Bablu was preventively detained on 15 April 2026 by the Surat Police Commissioner under the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985 as a "dangerous person". He challenged the detention, arguing that the alleged offences (under IPC sections 304(2) and 54) pertained only to law and order and did not …

The petitioner was preventively detained on 20‑04‑2026 as a “dangerous person” under Section 2(c) of the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985. He challenged the detention, arguing that the alleged offences pertained only to law and order and did not affect public order. The State contended that the pe…

Subhanbhai Movar was preventively detained on 20‑04‑2026 as a “dangerous person” under Section 2(c) of the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985. He challenged the order, arguing that the alleged offences, including bootlegging, pertained only to law and order and did not affect public order as require…

Imran GafurBhai Malani was preventively detained on 20‑04‑2026 under Section 2(c) of the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985 as a ‘dangerous person’. He challenged the detention, arguing that the alleged offences pertained only to law and order and did not affect public order as required by Section 3…

The petitioner was preventively detained on 18/04/2026 under the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985 as a "dangerous person". He challenged the detention, arguing that the alleged offences pertained only to law and order and did not affect public order as required by Section 3(4) of the Act. The Stat…

The petitioner was preventively detained on 29‑12‑2025 under the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985 as a "dangerous person". He challenged the detention, arguing that the alleged offences related only to law and order and did not affect public order as required by Section 3(4) of the Act. The State …

The petitioner, Sagar @ Mali, was preventively detained on 18‑04‑2026 as a “dangerous person” under Section 2(c) of the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985. He challenged the detention, arguing that the alleged offences related only to law and order and did not affect public order as required by Sect…

The petitioner was preventively detained on 18‑04‑2026 under the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985 as a ‘dangerous person’. He challenged the order, arguing that the alleged offences – bootlegging and a few assaults for which he had obtained bail – did not affect public order. The State contended t…

The petitioner was detained on 16‑04‑2026 as a “dangerous person” under Section 2(c) of the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985. He challenged the detention order, arguing that the alleged offences relate only to law and order and not to public order as required by Section 3(4). The State contended t…

Ilaben Hiteshbhai Dineshbhai was preventively detained on 22 April 2026 as a “dangerous person” under Section 2(c) of the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985. He challenged the detention, arguing that the alleged offences pertained only to law and order and did not affect public order as required by …

Amit Dineshbhai Sudhwani was preventively detained on 28‑04‑2026 under the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985 as a bootlegger. He challenged the detention, arguing that his alleged offences pertained only to law and order, not public order, as required by Section 3(4) of the Act. The State contended…

The petitioner, a self‑identified bootlegger, was preventively detained on 11 March 2026 by the District Magistrate under the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985. He challenged the detention, arguing that his alleged offences pertained only to law and order and did not affect public order as required…

Ashrafkhan @ Bapu Ajijakhan Usmankhan Pathan was detained on 29‑04‑2026 as a "dangerous person" under Section 2(c) of the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985. He challenged the detention, arguing that the offences for which he was booked pertained only to law and order and did not affect public order…

Kanabhai Laxmanbhai Gami was preventively detained on 2 April 2026 by the District Magistrate under the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985, on the ground that his bootlegging activities threatened public order. He filed a petition challenging the legality of the detention, arguing that the alleged o…

The petitioner, a bootlegger, was preventively detained on 6 April 2026 by the District Magistrate, Botad, under the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985. He filed a petition challenging the legality of the detention, arguing that his alleged offences pertained only to law and order and did not affect…

Vijaybhai Ravubhai Boricha was preventively detained on 15 April 2026 by the District Magistrate, Botad, under the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985 as a bootlegger. He challenged the detention, arguing that his alleged offences relate only to law and order, not public order as required by Section …

The petitioner was preventively detained on 29 April 2026 under the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985 as a “dangerous person”. He challenged the detention, arguing that the offences listed against him—various sections of the Indian Penal Code, the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention o…

The petitioner, Darsak @ Bogho Ravindrabhai Wadkar, was preventively detained on 18‑04‑2026 under the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985 as a "dangerous person". He challenged the detention, arguing that the cited offences under the Indian Penal Code pertained only to law and order and did not affec…

Vijaybhai @Faglo Pabjibhai Dantani was preventively detained on 18 April 2026 by the Ahmedabad Police Commissioner as a "dangerous person" under Section 2(c) of the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985. The detention was based on three criminal cases (Sections 303(2) and 54) for which bail had been gr…

The petitioner was preventively detained on 21‑04‑2026 under Section 3(1) of the Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1988. He challenged the detention, arguing that the alleged offences relate only to law and order and not to the "public order" contemplated by the Act. The S…

Mahesh was preventively detained on 29‑04‑2026 by the Surat Police Commissioner under the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985 as a bootlegger. He challenged the detention, arguing that his alleged offences pertained only to law and order and did not affect public order as required by Section 3(4) of …

The petitioner was preventively detained on 30‑04‑2026 by the Vadodara Police Commissioner as a "dangerous person" under Section 2(c) of the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985. He challenged the detention, arguing that the offences for which he was booked pertained only to law and order, not public …

The petitioner, a bootlegger, was preventively detained under the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985 on 13 April 2026 (detention effected on 30 April 2026). He challenged the detention, arguing that his alleged offences relate only to law and order and do not affect public order as required by Secti…

The petitioner, Nare​sh Madanlal Ghis​haji Chauhan, was preventively detained under the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985 on the ground that he was a bootlegger whose activities allegedly threatened public order. He challenged the detention order, arguing that the alleged offences under the Prohibi…

The petitioner was preventively detained on 29 April 2026 by the Surat Police Commissioner as a "dangerous person" under Section 2(c) of the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985. He challenged the detention, arguing that the alleged offences—registered under the Bombay Narcotic Substances Act (section…

The petitioner, Pankajbhai D., was preventively detained under the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985 on the basis of two bootlegging offences under the Prohibition Act. He challenged the detention, arguing that the alleged offences pertained to law and order, not public order, which is a prerequisi…

The petitioner, Sagar Harisingh Kaliya Pardi, was preventively detained on 27 February 2026 under the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985 as a "dangerous person". He challenged the detention, arguing that the alleged offences—registered under Sections 305(a), 331(4) and 54—pertained only to law and o…

Musabhai Allrakhbai Radiya was preventively detained on 12‑04‑2026 under the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985 as a “cruel person”. He challenged the order, arguing that his alleged offences relate only to law and order, not public order, and that he does not meet the statutory definition of a crue…

Ankush Kapoor, while in judicial custody, obtained an order from a Special NIA Judge extending his custody from 90 to 180 days under UAPA and the NDPS Act. He appealed the order but filed the appeal 146 days after the judgment, exceeding the 30‑day period prescribed by Section 21(5) of the National Investigation Agency…

The petitioner, Sachin @ Devraj Dharmabhai Pardi, was preventively detained on 27 February 2026 under the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985 as a "dangerous person" pursuant to Section 2(c). He challenged the detention, arguing that the alleged offences—registered under Sections 305(A), 331(3)(4) an…

The petitioner was preventively detained on 27 February 2026 under the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985 as a "dangerous person" based on three criminal cases for which he had been granted bail. He challenged the detention, arguing that the alleged offences pertained only to law and order and did n…

The petitioner, Bipinbhai Vasantbhai Vakatar, was preventively detained on 23 April 2026 by the District Magistrate, Jamnagar, under the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985 as a bootlegger. He challenged the detention, arguing that his alleged offences pertained only to law and order, not the public …

Jitendrakumar @ Banto Sampatsinh Chauhan was preventively detained on 25‑04‑2026 under the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985 as a bootlegger. He challenged the detention, arguing that the alleged offences pertained only to law and order and did not affect public order as required by Section 3(4) of…

The petitioner, Jagdishsing Mohansing Chauhan, was preventively detained on 16‑04‑2026 by the Police Commissioner of Vadodara under the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985 as a bootlegger. He challenged the detention, arguing that his alleged offences pertained only to law and order and did not affec…

The petitioner was preventively detained on 13 April 2026 under Section 2(c) of the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985 as a "dangerous person" based on five criminal cases registered in March 2026. He challenged the detention, arguing that the alleged offences pertained only to law and order and did…

The petitioner was preventively detained on 15.04.2026 by the Surat Police Commissioner as a "sexual offender" under Section 2(ha) of the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985. The petitioner challenged the detention, arguing that the alleged offences relate only to law and order and not to public orde…

The petitioner was preventively detained on 12‑04‑2026 by the District Magistrate of Devbhumi Dwarka under the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985 as a “cruel person”. The petitioner challenged the detention, arguing that the alleged offences did not relate to public order and that he did not meet th…

The petitioner, Riyaj, was preventively detained on 23 April 2026 under the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985 as a "dangerous person". He challenged the detention, arguing that the alleged offences pertained only to law and order and did not affect public order as required by Section 3(4) of the Ac…

The State of Gujarat appealed against the sentence imposed on Ranjit @Rajver Jilubhai Gida for offences under IPC sections 363, 366, 376, 114 and POCSO Act sections 4 and 11, seeking enhancement under Section 418 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The trial court had sentenced the accused to seven years ri…

The petitioner was preventively detained on 07‑04‑2026 under the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985 as a “dangerous person”. He challenged the detention, arguing that the alleged offences relate only to law and order and not to public order as required by Section 3(4) of the Act. The State contended…

The petitioner was preventively detained on 30 December 2025 under the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985 as a "dangerous person" based on two criminal cases. He challenged the detention, arguing that the alleged offences pertained only to law and order, not public order as required by Section 3(4) …

Amrutbhai Mehorbhai Rabari filed a Special Criminal Application (Habeas Corpus) before the Gujarat High Court seeking relief against the State of Gujarat. During the proceedings, the petitioner, through his counsel, requested permission to withdraw the petition. The court examined the petitioner's request and the repor…

The petitioner filed a Special Criminal Application (Habeas Corpus) before the Gujarat High Court seeking relief. The police report dated 20-04-2026 was placed on record. The petitioner's counsel requested permission to withdraw the petition, stating they would take appropriate action in accordance with law. The Court,…

The petitioner, Akashkumar Ramanbhai Chaudhari, filed a special criminal application (habeas corpus) seeking the release of his wife, who had been brought before the police. During police inquiry, the wife expressed a desire to live with her uncle, and the petitioner was present. The petitioner's counsel requested perm…

In Special Criminal Application (Habeas Corpus) No. 5404 of 2026, Rameshbhai Rannabhai Chaudhary filed a petition against the State of Gujarat and others alleging unlawful detention. The petition was supported by a police report dated 21.04.2026. The counsel for the petitioner sought permission from the court to withdr…

The petition was filed under habeas corpus on behalf of a 16-year‑old girl who had been in detention for about 16 years and 4 months. The girl expressed her desire to live with her mother. The police report from Bapunagar Police Station was placed on record. The Court considered whether the detention was unlawful and w…

Kishan Sureshbai Naydu was preventively detained on 2 March 2026 under Section 3(1) of the Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1988. He challenged the order, arguing that the alleged offences – registration of a case under Sections 8(c) and 20(b)(ii)(b) of the NDPS Act – per…

The petitioner was preventively detained on 03/04/2026 as a “dangerous person” under the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985. He challenged the detention, contending that the alleged offences pertained only to law and order and did not affect public order. The State argued that his habitual offending…

The petitioner, Bavanka Husenbhai Abdulbhai, was preventively detained on 13 February 2026 under the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985 as a "dangerous person". He challenged the detention, arguing that the alleged offences related only to law and order and did not affect public order as required by…

The petitioner was preventively detained on 20/02/2026 under Section 2(c) of the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985 as a "dangerous person". He challenged the detention, arguing that the alleged offences pertained only to law and order and did not affect public order as required by Section 3(4) of t…

The appellant, Tarjubhai Vehlabhai Naika, appealed his conviction for murder (IPC Sec. 302) and assault (IPC Sec. 504) sentenced to life imprisonment. He argued that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt, that the key eyewitnesses were relatives of the deceased and thus unreliable, that the a…

The appellant, Baldevbhai Budhaji Dhulaji Chauhan, was convicted of double murder under Sections 302 and 201 IPC and sentenced to death. The trial court relied on circumstantial evidence, including a disputed reconstruction panchnama, a hostile witness statement that the accused was last seen with a bag, alleged discov…

The appellant, Baldevbhai Budhaji Dhulaji Chauhan, was convicted of double murder under Sections 302 and 201 IPC and sentenced to death. The trial court relied on circumstantial evidence, including a disputed reconstruction panchnama, a hostile witness statement that the accused was last seen with a bag, alleged discov…

The applicant, Ankit Ramakrisna Tiwari, filed a Special Criminal Application seeking relief. The learned advocate for the applicant indicated that the petition was not pressed with a liberty to file a fresh application if necessary. The Court noted this deficiency and consequently disposed of the application. No substa…

Salman Mustak Haji filed a Special Criminal Application (R/SCR.A/4833/2026) before the Gujarat High Court seeking relief against the State of Gujarat and others. The petition was listed before a bench of Justices Ilesh J. Vora and R. T. Vachhani. At the hearing, the petitioner’s counsel, Mr. Junaid Y. Shaikh, was not p…

Hari Harji Gadhvi was preventively detained on 12 March 2026 by the District Magistrate, Kachchh, under the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985 as a bootlegger. He challenged the detention, arguing that the alleged offenses—registered under the Prohibition Act—pertained only to law and order and did …

The appellant, Sobhan Aryanfar, filed a regular bail appeal after the filing of a chargesheet. During the hearing, counsel for the appellant withdrew the appeal and sought permission to file a fresh bail application before the trial court if there is a change in factual circumstances. The High Court allowed the withdra…

The petitioner, Niravkumar Amratbhai Patel, filed a special criminal application before the Gujarat High Court. The petitioner’s counsel was absent when the matter was called for hearing. The Court, noting the lack of representation, dismissed the petition for want of prosecution. The judges reserved liberty to file a …

The appellant, Zubair Shaukat Ahmed Munshi, filed a regular bail application after the filing of a chargesheet. The appeal was pending before the Gujarat High Court while a co-accused, Sumerabanu, had a matter before the Supreme Court scheduled for 24 April 2026. The appellant's senior counsel sought a two‑week adjourn…

The petitioner was preventively detained on 19‑02‑2026 as a “dangerous person” under Section 2(c) of the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985, based on four criminal cases (three under IPC 304(2) and one under IPC 303(2)) for which he had already been granted bail. He challenged the legality of the de…

Mahmadhusen Habibbhai Katariya was preventively detained on 18‑02‑2026 under Section 2(c) of the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985 as a ‘dangerous person’. He challenged the detention, arguing that the alleged offences, recorded under the BNS Act, pertained only to law and order and did not affect …

The petitioner was preventively detained on 04/11/2025 as a "dangerous person" under Section 2(c) of the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985. He challenged the detention, arguing that the cited offenses relate only to law and order, not to public order as required by Section 3(4) of the Act. The Stat…

The petitioner, Rizwan Ahmad, filed a Special Criminal Application challenging an order of the Commissioner of Police. While the petition was pending, the order that was impugned was revoked by the authorities. The petitioner, through counsel, sought the Court's permission to withdraw the petition on the ground that th…

Ankur was preventively detained on 16‑02‑2026 under the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985 as a ‘dangerous person’ under Section 2(c). He challenged the detention, arguing that the alleged bootlegging offences cited in the order pertained only to law and order and did not affect public order as requ…

Munaf @ Munno was preventively detained on 17 January 2026 under Section 2(e) of the Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1988. He challenged the detention, arguing that the authority had no material to show that his alleged illicit traffic disturbed public health, order or t…

The petitioner, Dhanraj Savairam Raj, was preventively detained on 17‑02‑2026 under the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985 as a bootlegger. He challenged the detention, arguing that the alleged offenses related only to law and order and did not affect public order as required by Section 3(4) of the …

The petitioner was preventively detained on 21/02/2026 under the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985 as a bootlegger. He challenged the detention, arguing that the alleged offenses pertained only to law and order and did not affect public order as required by Section 3(4) of the Act. The State conten…

The petitioner, Anilbhai Pravinbhai Jani, was preventively detained on 21 February 2026 under the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985 as a "cyber offender" pursuant to Section 2(ba). He challenged the detention, arguing that no material showed any disturbance to public order, health, or tranquility a…

The petitioner, Sumit @ Sarkit, was preventively detained on 18‑02‑2026 under the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985 as a ‘dangerous person’ under Section 2(c). He challenged the detention, arguing that the offences cited against him—pertaining to assault and bootlegging—relate only to law and order…

Vinod Kishnji Bansiwal applied for regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 before the charge sheet was filed, alleging possession of contraband worth Rs. 22 lakhs without a permit and claiming a mediatory role. The prosecution opposed bail, citing the seriousness of the offences u…

The High Court of Gujarat considered an application for regular bail filed by Ajaykumar Pataram Thori under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, after a charge‑sheet had been filed for alleged offences under the Gujarat Prohibition Act and the BNS. The applicant argued that he was merely a passe…

Manilal Tersinh Jarpota was preventively detained on 19‑02‑2026 by the Police Commissioner, Vadodara, under the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985 as a bootlegger. He challenged the detention, arguing that the alleged offenses under the Prohibition Law pertained only to law and order, not public ord…

The petitioner, Faizal @ Manjro, was preventively detained on 18 February 2026 by the Surat Police Commissioner as a "dangerous person" under Section 2(c) of the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985. He challenged the detention, arguing that the alleged offenses related only to law and order and did n…

Rameshbhai Vershibhai Desai was preventively detained on 9 March 2026 as a "dangerous person" under Section 2(c) of the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985. He challenged the detention, arguing that the alleged offences pertained only to law and order and did not affect public order as required by Se…

Dipakbhai Ukabhai Jadav filed a pre‑detention application fearing detention under the PASA Act based on an FIR registered under the Gujarat Prohibition Act. The petitioner highlighted that co‑accused Rasikbhai Bhambhaniya and Rakeshkumar Gohil had earlier obtained quash of their detention orders in the same court. The …

The appellant, Bajiben Prabhathbhai Parmar, was convicted of murder under Section 302 of the IPC for allegedly pouring kerosene on the deceased, Rayliben, and igniting her, leading to her death. The appellant appealed the conviction and life sentence, arguing that the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable…

Vinubhai Kurjibhai Jadvani was preventively detained on 07.03.2026 under the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985 as a ‘cyber offender’. He challenged the detention, arguing that the alleged cyber offences under the Information Technology Act did not affect public order. The State contended that his h…

The petitioner, a bootlegger, was placed under preventive detention on 4 February 2026 by the Ahmedabad Police Commissioner under Section 2(b) of the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985. He challenged the order, arguing that the alleged offenses under the Prohibition Act pertained only to law and ord…

The petitioner, Arjunsinh Kirtisin Gajubha Vaghela, was preventively detained on 4 February 2026 under the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985 as a bootlegger. He challenged the detention, arguing that his alleged offences under the Prohibition Act pertained only to law and order, not public order. T…

The petitioner, Ramesh @ Jivan Hirabhai Bharwad, was preventively detained on 9 February 2026 by the District Magistrate of Kutch‑Bhuj under the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985 as a bootlegger. He challenged the detention, arguing that the alleged offenses pertained only to law and order and did …

The petitioner was preventively detained on 22‑12‑2025 under Section 2(c) of the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985 as a “dangerous person”. He challenged the detention, arguing that the alleged offenses related only to law and order and did not affect public order as required by Section 3(4) of the…

Shakir @ Andha was preventively detained on 10 February 2026 by the Surat Police Commissioner as a "dangerous person" under Section 2(c) of the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985. He challenged the order, arguing that the alleged offenses pertained only to law and order and did not affect public ord…

The petitioner, Saurav @ Tendal Ranjitsinh Thakur, was preventively detained on 5 February 2026 under Section 2(b) of the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑social Activities Act, 1985 as a bootlegger. He challenged the detention, arguing that the alleged offenses under the Gujarat Prohibition Act pertained only to law and ord…

The appellant Sandeepkumar Patel was convicted of murder under Section 302 IPC for stabbing Mazharkhan Pathan in a hotel room. The prosecution presented a chain of circumstantial evidence, including the hotel register, eyewitness testimony, and detailed medical findings of multiple fatal injuries. The defence argued th…

The appellant Khorban was convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge for murder under Section 302 IPC based largely on the testimony of hostile witnesses and statements recorded by the investigating officer under Sections 161 and 162 CrPC. The High Court examined the post‑mortem report confirming homicidal death but fo…