HIRAL SATISHCHANDRA KANSARA vs Government of Gujarat Advocate - DGP — 343/2026

Case under The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 483,. Disposed: Contested--REJECTED on 07th March 2026.

CRMA S - CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION - SESSIONS

CNR: GJGN010007622026

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

341/2026

Filing Date

28-02-2026

Registration No

343/2026

Registration Date

28-02-2026

Court

DISTRICT COURT, GANDHINAGAR

Judge

3-3rd ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE

Decision Date

07th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--REJECTED

Acts & Sections

THE BHARATIYA NAGARIK SURAKSHA SANHITA, 2023 Section 483,
THE BHARATIYA NYAYA SANHITA, 2023 Section 316(2),318(4),319(2),61(2),
THE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY (AMENDMENT) ACT, 2008 Section 66D,

Petitioner(s)

HIRAL SATISHCHANDRA KANSARA

Adv. P J MISTRY

Respondent(s)

Government of Gujarat Advocate - DGP

Hearing History

Judge: 3-3rd ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE

07-03-2026

Disposed

06-03-2026

HEARING

05-03-2026

HEARING

03-03-2026

HEARING

Final Orders / Judgements

07-03-2026
JUDEGEMENT

Court Decision Summary The 3rd Additional District and Sessions Judge of Gandhinagar granted regular bail to the accused under IPC Sections 316(2), 318(4), 319(2), 61(2), and ITA Section 66(D), ordering release on regular bail in a case involving alleged online trading fraud and financial misconduct. The court found that while serious charges exist, the investigation status, lack of conclusive evidence linking the accused to proceeds of crime, and absence of imminent flight risk warranted bail with appropriate conditions rather than continued custody. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Court Decision Summary The 3rd Additional District and Sessions Judge of Gandhinagar granted regular bail to the accused under IPC Sections 316(2), 318(4), 319(2), 61(2), and ITA Section 66(D), ordering release on regular bail in a case involving alleged online trading fraud and financial misconduct. The court found that while serious charges exist, the investigation status, lack of conclusive evidence linking the accused to proceeds of crime, and absence of imminent flight risk warranted bail with appropriate conditions rather than continued custody. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

DISTRICT COURT, GANDHINAGAR All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case