ISHANBHAI BALMUKUNDBHAI SHAH vs STATE OF GUJARAT Advocate - M R PATEL — 2/2026
Case under The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 438. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 20th April 2026.
CR RA - CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION
CNR: GJKH180001092026
Filing Number
2/2026
Filing Date
17-Feb-2026
Registration No
2/2026
Registration Date
17-Feb-2026
Court
Addl. District Court,Kapadvanj
Judge
1-Addl. District Judge
Decision Date
20-Apr-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ALLOWED
Last updated 16-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.ISHANBHAI BALMUKUNDBHAI SHAH
Adv. S A KAZI
Respondent(s)
-
1.STATE OF GUJARAT Advocate - M R PATEL
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
20-Apr-2026
Order
Summary of Case 2/2026 Court's Decision: The High Court of Gujarat granted the criminal revision petition filed by Ishanbhai Balmukundbhai Shah, setting aside the lower court's order that had frozen Rs. 1,45,000 in a bank account under IPC Section 438. The court held that the police lacked legal authority to freeze these funds in a cybercrime case, as such detention powers are limited to specific criminal matters and do not extend to general offenses. The court ordered the release of the frozen amount along with custody of the seized funds to the petitioner, directing the police to submit compliance reports and the trial court to facilitate proper deposit handling procedures. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
20-Apr-2026
Disposed
Addl. District Judge
-
03-Apr-2026
Order On Urgent Hearing
Addl. District Judge
-
20-Mar-2026
Order On Urgent Hearing
Addl. District Judge
-
17-Mar-2026
Urgent Hearing
Addl. District Judge
-
10-Mar-2026
Urgent Hearing
Addl. District Judge
-
03-Mar-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
17-Feb-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 2/2026
Summary of Case 2/2026 Court's Decision: The High Court of Gujarat granted the criminal revision petition filed by Ishanbhai Balmukundbhai Shah, setting aside the lower court's order that had frozen Rs. 1,45,000 in a bank account under IPC Section 438. The court held that the police lacked legal authority to freeze these funds in a cybercrime case, as such detention powers are limited to specific criminal matters and do not extend to general offenses. The court ordered the release of the frozen amount along with custody of the seized funds to the petitioner, directing the police to submit compliance reports and the trial court to facilitate proper deposit handling procedures. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts