NAVNIT KALABHAI RAVALIYA vs State of Gujarat Advocate - APP — 186/2026
Case under The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 503. Disposed: Uncontested--ALLOWED on 14th March 2026.
CRMA J - CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATI- JMFC
CNR: GJGS020008632026
Filing Number
186/2026
Filing Date
13-03-2026
Registration No
186/2026
Registration Date
13-03-2026
Court
Civil Court, Veraval
Judge
8-CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE
Decision Date
14th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--ALLOWED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
NAVNIT KALABHAI RAVALIYA
Respondent(s)
State of Gujarat Advocate - APP (Assistant Public Prosecutor)
Hearing History
Judge: 8-CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE
Disposed
PROCESS TO OPPONENT
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 14-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 13-03-2026 | PROCESS TO OPPONENT |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: CRI.M.A. No. 186/2026 Petitioner: Navnit Kalabhai Ravaliya Respondent: State of Gujarat Court: Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gir-Somnath The court granted the petitioner's application under BNS Section 503, ordering the release of seized funds totaling ₹134,000 that were frozen in suspicious bank accounts following a cybercrime fraud complaint. The court found that no FIR was filed despite considerable time passing, no arrests were made, no other claimants came forward, and police confirmed they had no objection to returning the funds. The court directed the bank to transfer the seized amounts to Bank of Baroda custody, subject to conditions that the petitioner produce the funds if court-ordered and that any legitimate claimant asserting rights would require the petitioner to return them. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: CRI.M.A. No. 186/2026 Petitioner: Navnit Kalabhai Ravaliya Respondent: State of Gujarat Court: Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gir-Somnath The court granted the petitioner's application under BNS Section 503, ordering the release of seized funds totaling ₹134,000 that were frozen in suspicious bank accounts following a cybercrime fraud complaint. The court found that no FIR was filed despite considerable time passing, no arrests were made, no other claimants came forward, and police confirmed they had no objection to returning the funds. The court directed the bank to transfer the seized amounts to Bank of Baroda custody, subject to conditions that the petitioner produce the funds if court-ordered and that any legitimate claimant asserting rights would require the petitioner to return them. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts