UTSAV CHANDUBHAI BHESANIYA vs Government of Gujarat — 29/2026

Case under The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 480. Disposed: Contested--REJECTED on 16th March 2026.

Case disposed

CRMA J - CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION - JMFC

CNR: GJAM030002762026

Filing Number

29/2026

Filing Date

09-Mar-2026

Registration No

29/2026

Registration Date

09-Mar-2026

Court

TALUKA COURT, DHARI

Judge

2-Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.

Decision Date

16-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--REJECTED

Last updated 23-Apr-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

11193013250232

Police Station

CHALALA POLICE STATION - AMRELI DISTRICT

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 480

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.UTSAV CHANDUBHAI BHESANIYA

    Adv. A M VALA

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Government of Gujarat

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 16-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

    The court rejected the accused's bail petition in a cybercrime case involving online fraud through multiple bank accounts across different states. The court found the charges under IPC sections 317(2), 317(4), and 54 to be prima facie established, noting the accused's involvement in similar crimes previously registered in other jurisdictions, making bail inappropriate given the serious nature of the offenses and flight risk concerns. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 16-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.

  4. 13-Mar-2026

    Order/Judgement

    Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.

  5. 12-Mar-2026

    Order/Judgement

    Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.

  6. 11-Mar-2026

    Hearing

    Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.

  7. 10-Mar-2026

    Hearing

    Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.

  8. 09-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  9. 09-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 29/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The court rejected the accused's bail petition in a cybercrime case involving online fraud through multiple bank accounts across different states. The court found the charges under IPC sections 317(2), 317(4), and 54 to be prima facie established, noting the accused's involvement in similar crimes previously registered in other jurisdictions, making bail inappropriate given the serious nature of the offenses and flight risk concerns. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case