CHAVDA ABHAY HARIBHAI vs State of Gujarat Advocate - APP — 188/2026
Case under The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 503. Disposed: Uncontested--ALLOWED on 14th March 2026.
CRMA J - CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATI- JMFC
CNR: GJGS020008682026
Filing Number
188/2026
Filing Date
13-03-2026
Registration No
188/2026
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)
CHAVDA ABHAY HARIBHAI
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. 188/2026 The court approved the petitioner Chavda Abhay Haribhai's application under BNS Section 503 for return of frozen funds. The petitioner reported a cyber fraud/financial fraud involving unauthorized bank transfer of ₹27,934 from his ICICI Bank account to a suspicious account, which was subsequently frozen by cyber police under BNS Section 106. The investigating officer supported returning the funds, confirming no FIR was filed and no other claimant challenged the petitioner's ownership. The court ordered release of the seized amount to the petitioner's custody upon furnishing personal and surety bonds, with conditions that he produce the funds before the court if required and return them if any legitimate third-party claim emerges. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: CRI.M.A. No. 188/2026 The court approved the petitioner Chavda Abhay Haribhai's application under BNS Section 503 for return of frozen funds. The petitioner reported a cyber fraud/financial fraud involving unauthorized bank transfer of ₹27,934 from his ICICI Bank account to a suspicious account, which was subsequently frozen by cyber police under BNS Section 106. The investigating officer supported returning the funds, confirming no FIR was filed and no other claimant challenged the petitioner's ownership. The court ordered release of the seized amount to the petitioner's custody upon furnishing personal and surety bonds, with conditions that he produce the funds before the court if required and return them if any legitimate third-party claim emerges. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts