RAVIRAJSINH VIPULSINH PARMAR vs The State of Gujarat Advocate - APP — 32/2026
Case under The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 503. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 17th March 2026.
CRMA J - CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION - JMFC
CNR: GJBT050001772026
Filing Number
32/2026
Filing Date
10-03-2026
Registration No
32/2026
Registration Date
10-03-2026
Court
TALUKA COURT, BARWALA
Judge
1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Decision Date
17th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ALLOWED
FIR Details
Police Station
CYBER CRIME POLICE STATION - BOTAD DISTRICT
Year
0
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
RAVIRAJSINH VIPULSINH PARMAR
Adv. P M RATHOD
Respondent(s)
The State of Gujarat Advocate - APP (Assistant Public Prosecutor)
Hearing History
Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Disposed
REPLY
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 17-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 13-03-2026 | REPLY |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: CRMA 32/2026 The court allowed Ravirajsinh Vipulsinh Parmar's application for recovery of ₹5,540 seized in a cyber fraud case. The petitioner's account was compromised, resulting in ₹10,358 transferred to a fraudulent SBI account and ₹361 to a fake Jio Payments Bank account. The investigating officer confirmed the accounts appeared to be created solely for fraud. The court granted interim custody of the seized amount to the petitioner upon furnishing personal surety and sureties equivalent to 1.5 times the amount, with banks directed to transfer the funds within 10 days. The fraudulent accounts are to be permanently closed post-transfer to prevent further misuse. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: CRMA 32/2026 The court allowed Ravirajsinh Vipulsinh Parmar's application for recovery of ₹5,540 seized in a cyber fraud case. The petitioner's account was compromised, resulting in ₹10,358 transferred to a fraudulent SBI account and ₹361 to a fake Jio Payments Bank account. The investigating officer confirmed the accounts appeared to be created solely for fraud. The court granted interim custody of the seized amount to the petitioner upon furnishing personal surety and sureties equivalent to 1.5 times the amount, with banks directed to transfer the funds within 10 days. The fraudulent accounts are to be permanently closed post-transfer to prevent further misuse. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts