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.
CRMA J - CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION - JMFC
CNR: GJKT020020492026
Filing Number
529/2026
Filing Date
07-03-2026
Registration No
529/2026
Registration Date
07-03-2026
Court
CIVIL COURT BHUJ
Judge
1-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE
Decision Date
20th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ALLOWED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
ASHOKBHAI JETHALAL GAMI
Adv. N L VAGHELA
Respondent(s)
Government of Gujarat Advocate - APP (Assistant Public Prosecutor)
Hearing History
Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE
Disposed
HEARING
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 20-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 11-03-2026 | HEARING |
Final Orders / Judgements
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.
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.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts