PANCHAL MAYURIBEN W/o NARESHKUMAR vs LALIT KUMAR — 35/2026
Case under The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 503,. Disposed: Uncontested--ALLOWED on 07th March 2026.
CRMA J - CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION - JMFC
CNR: GJPT020002082026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
35/2026
Filing Date
07-01-2026
Registration No
35/2026
Registration Date
07-01-2026
Court
CIVIL COURT PATAN
Judge
11-CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE & ADDL. SR. CIVIL JUDGE
Decision Date
07th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--ALLOWED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
PANCHAL MAYURIBEN W/o NARESHKUMAR
Adv. U G KELA
Respondent(s)
LALIT KUMAR
RAJSTHAN STATE BEVERAGES CORPORATION
JAYA SINGH D/o ASHOK SINGH
Hearing History
Judge: 11-CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE & ADDL. SR. CIVIL JUDGE
Disposed
ORDER/JUDGEMENT
REPLY OF I.O.
REPLY OF I.O.
REPLY OF I.O.
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 07-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 05-03-2026 | ORDER/JUDGEMENT | |
| 16-02-2026 | REPLY OF I.O. | |
| 03-02-2026 | REPLY OF I.O. | |
| 21-01-2026 | REPLY OF I.O. |
Final Orders / Judgements
Court Decision Summary The Chief Judicial Magistrate of Patan allowed the applicant's petition under Section 503 of BNSS and ordered the refund of Rs. 75,193/- that was frozen in suspect bank accounts following a cyber crime complaint filed on the Ashwast Project helpline. The court found that no FIR was lodged, the bank accounts were fake, and no other claimant came forward, making the applicant entitled to recovery. The refund was granted on conditions of furnishing personal bond and surety equal to 1.5 times the frozen amount, with restrictions on its use and production before court if required. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Court Decision Summary The Chief Judicial Magistrate of Patan allowed the applicant's petition under Section 503 of BNSS and ordered the refund of Rs. 75,193/- that was frozen in suspect bank accounts following a cyber crime complaint filed on the Ashwast Project helpline. The court found that no FIR was lodged, the bank accounts were fake, and no other claimant came forward, making the applicant entitled to recovery. The refund was granted on conditions of furnishing personal bond and surety equal to 1.5 times the frozen amount, with restrictions on its use and production before court if required. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts