ASHOKBHAI JETHALAL GAMI vs Government of Gujarat Advocate - APP — 529/2026

Case under The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 497,503. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 20th March 2026.

Case disposed

CRMA J - CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION - JMFC

CNR: GJKT020020492026

Filing Number

529/2026

Filing Date

07-Mar-2026

Registration No

529/2026

Registration Date

07-Mar-2026

Court

CIVIL COURT BHUJ

Judge

1-Principal Senior CIVIL Judge

Decision Date

20-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.ASHOKBHAI JETHALAL GAMI

    Adv. N L VAGHELA

Respondent(s)

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

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 20-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

    The court approved the applicant Ashokkumar Jethalal Gami's petition under Section 497 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, ordering the release of frozen bank funds totaling approximately ₹36,597.61 that were seized in a cybercrime case. The court found that the applicant was a victim of cyber fraud, the suspected bank accounts had been identified and seized, and continued freezing would cause financial hardship; therefore, the funds would be unfrozen upon submission of personal and surety bonds worth 1.5 times the frozen amount, subject to conditions that the applicant produce the funds if any third party claims ownership. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 20-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge

  4. 11-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  5. 07-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 529/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The court approved the applicant Ashokkumar Jethalal Gami's petition under Section 497 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, ordering the release of frozen bank funds totaling approximately ₹36,597.61 that were seized in a cybercrime case. The court found that the applicant was a victim of cyber fraud, the suspected bank accounts had been identified and seized, and continued freezing would cause financial hardship; therefore, the funds would be unfrozen upon submission of personal and surety bonds worth 1.5 times the frozen amount, subject to conditions that the applicant produce the funds if any third party claims ownership. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case