IMRAN HAJI RAFIK DOSANI vs RADHARANI GLOBAL FIRM — 38/2025
Case under The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 223. Status: EVIDENCE OF COMPLAINANT. Next hearing: 30th June 2026.
CR EN - CRIMINAL ENQUIRY
CNR: GJJM100012232025
Next Hearing
30th June 2026
Filing Number
38/2025
Filing Date
28-11-2025
Registration No
38/2025
Registration Date
28-11-2025
Court
TALUKA COURT, DHROL
Judge
1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
IMRAN HAJI RAFIK DOSANI
Adv. A A VAGHERA
Respondent(s)
RADHARANI GLOBAL FIRM
RAVI JITENDRABHAI SEDANI
Hearing History
Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
EVIDENCE OF COMPLAINANT
EVIDENCE OF COMPLAINANT
EVIDENCE OF COMPLAINANT
ORDER
SUMMONS - NOTICE
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 08-06-2026 | EVIDENCE OF COMPLAINANT |
| 30-05-2026 | EVIDENCE OF COMPLAINANT |
| 02-05-2026 | EVIDENCE OF COMPLAINANT |
| 13-04-2026 | ORDER |
| 16-03-2026 | SUMMONS - NOTICE |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: Criminal Inquiry 38/2025 Case: Criminal Inquiry No. 38/2025 Petitioner: Imran Haji Rafik Dosani Respondents: Radharani Global Firm and Ravi Jitendrabhai Sedani Outcome: The case was adjourned for further investigation under Section 223 of the Indian Code of Criminal Procedure. The court directed that the inquiry be kept pending for additional examination, and the petitioner was ordered to submit any further evidence if available under Section 223(2) CrPC. The court found insufficient compliance with the statutory requirements under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act before proceeding with cognizance of the offense. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: Criminal Inquiry 38/2025 Case: Criminal Inquiry No. 38/2025 Petitioner: Imran Haji Rafik Dosani Respondents: Radharani Global Firm and Ravi Jitendrabhai Sedani Outcome: The case was adjourned for further investigation under Section 223 of the Indian Code of Criminal Procedure. The court directed that the inquiry be kept pending for additional examination, and the petitioner was ordered to submit any further evidence if available under Section 223(2) CrPC. The court found insufficient compliance with the statutory requirements under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act before proceeding with cognizance of the offense. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts