Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 106 - 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 113Nominal IndexArvindSingh GangaSingh Solanki v/s State of Gujarat & Batch, 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 106X v/s State of Gujarat & Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 107Yusufbhai Jivanbhai Patel @ Mahendrabhai Jivabhai Vasava & Ors. v/s State of Gujarat, 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 108Jayesh Batukhai Patel (Vanani) v/s State of Gujarat & Ors.,...
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 106 - 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 113
Nominal Index
ArvindSingh GangaSingh Solanki v/s State of Gujarat & Batch, 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 106
X v/s State of Gujarat & Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 107
Yusufbhai Jivanbhai Patel @ Mahendrabhai Jivabhai Vasava & Ors. v/s State of Gujarat, 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 108
Jayesh Batukhai Patel (Vanani) v/s State of Gujarat & Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 109
Jitendrakumar Ambalal Kondi v/s State of Gujarat & Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 110
X v/s State of Gujarat, 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 111
Harpreet Singh Talwar @ Kabir Talwar v/s State of Gujarat & Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 112
Varsha Mukhesbhai Katara v/s State of Election Commission through Secretary & Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 113
Judgments/Orders
Case title: ArvindSingh GangaSingh Solanki v/s State of Gujarat & Batch
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 412 of 2005 and connected appeals
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 106
The Gujarat High Court overturned a trial court order which had convicted four men for "preparing to commit dacoity" after noting that the prosecution had failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt.
In doing so the court also noted that trial court had failed to appreciate the legal requirement of five or more persons to commit the offence. It also said that prosecution's case cannot be believed since the information received had not been recorded in the police station diary nor was it recorded in the personal diary of any of the police witnesses.
Further the information alleged to have been provided by the informant had not been verified to know whether the informant was harbouring any enmity against the accused, who as proved by the Investigating Officer, were all in the profession as diamond cutters.
Case title: X v/s State of Gujarat & Anr.
R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL) NO. 126 of 2026
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 107
The Gujarat High Court granted regular bail to a teenage boy booked for stabbing his schoolmate last year, after taking note of probation officer's report which stated that the boy had been "continuously bullied" by the deceased.
Noting that the petitioner is a school going child and the trial will take its own time to conclude the court granted bail to the petitioner, with the condition that the father will take care of his child for his good behaviour and his well being.
The petitioner, aged about 14 years and 9 months at the time of the alleged act, was arrested on 22.08.2025 for offences under Sections 109(1) (attempt to murder) and 103(1) (murder) BNS and section 135(1) of the G.P. Act. It was alleged that the petitioner had given a fatal blow to the deceased child with a knife, opposite their school on a public road. The chargesheet stated that the petitioner was "harbouring the previous enmity" against the deceased.
Case title: Yusufbhai Jivanbhai Patel @ Mahendrabhai Jivabhai Vasava & Ors. v/s State of Gujarat
R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (AGAINST ORDER PASSED BY SUBORDINATE COURT) NO. 2 of 2025
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 108
The Gujarat High Court refused to interfere with a trial court order which had declined to discharge five men booked in 2021 in an alleged case of forced religious conversion in Bharuch, remarking that it cannot in revisional jurisdiction conduct a mini trial and can only find out if a prima facie case is made out.
The five petitioners had moved the high court challenging a trial court order which had refused to discharge them in a case lodged under Section 4 (punishment for forcible conversion) of the Gujarat Freedom of Religion Act, 2003 read with IPC Sections 120(B)(criminal conspiracy), 153B(1)(c) (Imputations, assertions prejudicial to national-integration) and 506(2)(criminal intimidation).
Case title: Jayesh Batukhai Patel (Vanani) v/s State of Gujarat & Ors.
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5056 of 2026
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 109
The Gujarat High Court on Monday (April 6) directed the authorities to include the name of a man in the electoral roll of the concerned legislative assembly constituency, after noting that despite an earlier order directing his inclusion the petitioner's name had been left out by the electoral officer.
In doing so the court said that the earlier order by the concerned officer who had accepted the petitioner's plea for inclusion was passed prior to publication of preliminary roll, and in view of the fact that final list was scheduled for publication on April 10 the petitioner cannot be denied the right to participate in the polls due to a technicality.
The petitioner had challenged an endorsement dated 4.4.2026 by which the Electoral Officer has refused to include his name in the electoral roll.
Case title: Jitendrakumar Ambalal Kondi v/s State of Gujarat & Ors.
R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (FOR MAINTENANCE) NO. 624 of 2014
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 110
The Gujarat High Court upheld an order directing a husband to undergo imprisonment of 660 days for failing to pay maintenance to his wife and children, after noting that the husband had himself surrendered before the court stating that he was unable to pay the maintenance amount.
In doing so the court said that it is the husband's legal and ethical duty to maintain his wife and provide financial support to her and their children and he cannot shirk this responsibility.
The husband had moved the high court challenging Family Court's order directing the husband to undergo simple imprisonment for 660 days for failing to pay maintenance to his wife.
Case title: X v/s State of Gujarat
R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL) NO. 1400 of 2025
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 111
The Gujarat High Court granted bail to a child-in-conflict with law booked along with other CCLs for murder of another minor boy, after noting that the Juvenile Justice Board as well as the appellate court/children's court did not give reasons for rejecting the bail plea.
It further noted that both the JJB and the appellate court had dealt with the CCL's bail plea not as one under section 12 of Juvenile Justice Act but as one under CrPC.
Justice Gita Gopi in her order said:
"The JJB as well as the learned Appellate Court was required to give the reasons explaining as to how the release of the CCL would be detrimental to the ends of justice. Even without calling for the Report of the Probation Officer and the Report of the Clinical Psychologist, the bail application of the present CCL, aged about 14 years has been dealt with. Both the Courts, i.e. learned JJB as well as the learned Appellate Court has dealt with the application for bail of the present CCL as if they were dealing with of a heinous crime committed by an adult".
Case title: Harpreet Singh Talwar @ Kabir Talwar v/s State of Gujarat & Anr.
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL (REGULAR BAIL - AFTER CHARGESHEET) NO. 15 of 2026
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 112
The Gujarat High Court granted bail to a man booked in a case over seizure of 2,988 kg heroin consignment in Mundra port in 2021, observing that despite timeline to conduct the trial given by the Supreme Court the prosecution agency NIA could not ensure deposition of all witnesses relevant to the accused.
This, the court said, established that there had been an "inordinate delay" in the conduct of the trial despite orders passed by the Supreme Court.
A division bench of Justice NS Sanjay Gowda and Justice DM Vyas in its order said that when the appellant had approached the Supreme Court for bail, on 25.9.2024 the apex court while noting that charges were yet to be framed had thought it fit to issue directions to ensure examination of all witnesses who were relevant as against the appellant.
Case title: Varsha Mukhesbhai Katara v/s State of Election Commission through Secretary & Ors.
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5261 of 2026
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 113
The Gujarat High Court has said that State Election Commission does not exercise any independent right over inclusion or deletion of names from its electoral rolls, and it only is empowered to replicate the electoral roll of the Assembly constituency
In doing so, it granted relief to a woman whose request for inclusion in the roll to participate in the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation elections was earlier denied despite acceptance of her inclusion application, on the ground that her application was allowed after publication of the preliminary list.