AYAR ARJANBHAI MADEVBHAI vs BANK OF MAHARASHTRA — 487/2025
Case under The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 503,. Disposed: Uncontested--ALLOWED on 07th March 2026.
CRMA J - CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION - JMFC
CNR: GJPT020035962025
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
487/2025
Filing Date
04-08-2025
Registration No
487/2025
Registration Date
04-08-2025
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)
AYAR ARJANBHAI MADEVBHAI
Adv. U G KELA
Respondent(s)
BANK OF MAHARASHTRA
Hearing History
Judge: 11-CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE & ADDL. SR. CIVIL JUDGE
Disposed
ORDER/JUDGEMENT
EVIDENCE OF APPLICANT
EVIDENCE OF APPLICANT
EVIDENCE OF APPLICANT
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 07-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 05-03-2026 | ORDER/JUDGEMENT | |
| 16-02-2026 | EVIDENCE OF APPLICANT | |
| 03-02-2026 | EVIDENCE OF APPLICANT | |
| 21-01-2026 | EVIDENCE OF APPLICANT |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary The Chief Judicial Magistrate at Patan allowed the applicant's application under Section 503 of the BNSS, ordering the refund of Rs. 15,000/- that was fraudulently withdrawn from the applicant's SBI account in a cyber crime case and frozen in a suspect bank account. The court found that since no FIR was lodged, no arrests made, no other claimants emerged despite passage of time, and the investigating officer opined positively for refund, the applicant was entitled to the money. The refund is conditional on furnishing a personal bond and surety, with provisions for return if any legitimate claimant emerges. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary The Chief Judicial Magistrate at Patan allowed the applicant's application under Section 503 of the BNSS, ordering the refund of Rs. 15,000/- that was fraudulently withdrawn from the applicant's SBI account in a cyber crime case and frozen in a suspect bank account. The court found that since no FIR was lodged, no arrests made, no other claimants emerged despite passage of time, and the investigating officer opined positively for refund, the applicant was entitled to the money. The refund is conditional on furnishing a personal bond and surety, with provisions for return if any legitimate claimant emerges. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts