MAHESHWARI RAHUL vs Government of Gujarat Advocate - APP — 483/2026

Case under The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 497,503. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 13th March 2026.

Case disposed

CRMA J - CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION - JMFC

CNR: GJKT020018382026

Filing Number

483/2026

Filing Date

02-Mar-2026

Registration No

483/2026

Registration Date

02-Mar-2026

Court

CIVIL COURT BHUJ

Judge

2-Chief Judicial Magistrate

Decision Date

13-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED

Last updated 21-May-2026

Acts & Sections

The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 497,503

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.MAHESHWARI RAHUL

    Adv. J R CHAUHAN

Respondent(s)

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

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 13-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

    The Chief Judicial Magistrate at Bhuj allowed the cybercrime victim's application and ordered the release of Rs. 7,175/- in frozen bank funds, finding that the investigating officer failed to comply with mandatory notification requirements under Section 106 of the BNSS. The court directed banks to transfer funds to the victim within 10 days upon receipt of a bond/surety, and held that banks cannot demand No Objection Certificates from other agencies before complying with court orders for fund release. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 13-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  4. 12-Mar-2026

    Hearing

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  5. 11-Mar-2026

    Hearing

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  6. 10-Mar-2026

    Hearing

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  7. 09-Mar-2026

    Hearing

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  8. 07-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  9. 02-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 483/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The Chief Judicial Magistrate at Bhuj allowed the cybercrime victim's application and ordered the release of Rs. 7,175/- in frozen bank funds, finding that the investigating officer failed to comply with mandatory notification requirements under Section 106 of the BNSS. The court directed banks to transfer funds to the victim within 10 days upon receipt of a bond/surety, and held that banks cannot demand No Objection Certificates from other agencies before complying with court orders for fund release. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case