IRFAN USMANBHAI SIPAI vs Government of Gujarat Advocate - APP — 148/2026
Case under The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 497,503,. Disposed: Uncontested--ALLOWED on 25th March 2026.
CRMA J - CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION
CNR: GJMH030004952026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
148/2026
Filing Date
19-02-2026
Registration No
148/2026
Registration Date
19-02-2026
Court
TALUKA COURT, KADI
Judge
2-2nd ADDL. SR. CIVIL JUDGE & A.C.J.M.
Decision Date
25th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--ALLOWED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
IRFAN USMANBHAI SIPAI
Adv. J A GANCHI
Respondent(s)
Government of Gujarat Advocate - APP (Assistant Public Prosecutor)
BANK OF BARODA
Hearing History
Judge: 2-2nd ADDL. SR. CIVIL JUDGE & A.C.J.M.
Disposed
PROCESS TO OPPONENT
PROCESS TO OPPONENT
PROCESS TO OPPONENT
PROCESS TO OPPONENT
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 25-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 23-03-2026 | PROCESS TO OPPONENT | |
| 18-03-2026 | PROCESS TO OPPONENT | |
| 16-03-2026 | PROCESS TO OPPONENT | |
| 10-03-2026 | PROCESS TO OPPONENT |
Final Orders / Judgements
The 2nd Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate at Kadi partially allowed the applicant's application and ordered the return of Rs. 22,500 from a frozen bank account (out of Rs. 44,000 seized in a cyber crime case) to the applicant as interim custody, subject to furnishing surety and personal bond of 1.5 times the amount. The court relied on the Investigating Officer's positive opinion and Supreme Court precedent, with conditions that the applicant must produce the amount when ordered and return it if any other claimant proves their interest in the funds. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The 2nd Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate at Kadi partially allowed the applicant's application and ordered the return of Rs. 22,500 from a frozen bank account (out of Rs. 44,000 seized in a cyber crime case) to the applicant as interim custody, subject to furnishing surety and personal bond of 1.5 times the amount. The court relied on the Investigating Officer's positive opinion and Supreme Court precedent, with conditions that the applicant must produce the amount when ordered and return it if any other claimant proves their interest in the funds. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts