KOTWAL NAJMA HAJI vs State of Gujarat Advocate - APP — 190/2026

Case under The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 503. Disposed: Uncontested--ALLOWED on 14th March 2026.

Case disposed

CRMA J - CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATI- JMFC

CNR: GJGS020008752026

Filing Number

190/2026

Filing Date

13-Mar-2026

Registration No

190/2026

Registration Date

13-Mar-2026

Court

Civil Court, Veraval

Judge

8-Chief Judicial Magistrate

Decision Date

14-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--ALLOWED

Last updated 07-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 503

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.KOTWAL NAJMA HAJI

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.State of Gujarat Advocate - APP (Assistant Public Prosecutor)

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

    Summary of Case 190/2026 The court granted petitioner Kotwal Najma Haji's application under BNS Section 503 to recover ₹61,000 that was seized from her bank accounts following a cyber fraud complaint. The court found that funds were fraudulently transferred from her accounts to suspicious accounts, and since no FIR was filed and no other claimant appeared despite considerable time passing, the petitioner was entitled to custody of the seized funds. The court ordered the funds released subject to conditions that the petitioner execute a bond and appear when directed, and that claims by other interested parties would require return of the funds. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 14-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  4. 13-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  5. 13-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 190/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary of Case 190/2026 The court granted petitioner Kotwal Najma Haji's application under BNS Section 503 to recover ₹61,000 that was seized from her bank accounts following a cyber fraud complaint. The court found that funds were fraudulently transferred from her accounts to suspicious accounts, and since no FIR was filed and no other claimant appeared despite considerable time passing, the petitioner was entitled to custody of the seized funds. The court ordered the funds released subject to conditions that the petitioner execute a bond and appear when directed, and that claims by other interested parties would require return of the funds. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case