MOHAMMAD UVAISE vs GOVERNMENT OF GUJARAT Advocate - DGP — 366/2026

Case under The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 482. Disposed: Contested--REJECTED on 02nd April 2026.

CRMA S - CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION - SESSIONS

CNR: GJRJ010009112026

Case disposed

Filing Number

366/2026

Filing Date

07-02-2026

Registration No

366/2026

Registration Date

07-02-2026

Court

DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT RAJKOT

Judge

7-5th ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE

Decision Date

02nd April 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--REJECTED

FIR Details

FIR Number

11208003251199

Police Station

GANDHIGRAM / UNIVERSITY ( GANDHIGRAM-2 ) - RAJKOT DISTRICT

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

THE BHARATIYA NAGARIK SURAKSHA SANHITA, 2023 Section 482
THE BHARATIYA NYAYA SANHITA, 2023 Section 318(4),3(5)

Petitioner(s)

MOHAMMAD UVAISE

Adv. S DWIVEDI

ABDUL LATHEEF N V

SHAHANA BANU N V

IMMUL HASNA

Respondent(s)

GOVERNMENT OF GUJARAT Advocate - DGP

Hearing History

Judge: 7-5th ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE

02-04-2026

Disposed

27-03-2026

ORDER

11-03-2026

HEARING

02-03-2026

HEARING

26-02-2026

HEARING

Final Orders / Judgements

02-04-2026
ORDER

Court Decision Summary The Rajkot Sessions Court rejected the anticipatory bail application of four directors of Aramfly Private Limited accused of cheating immigration consultancy clients of ₹2.68 crore by falsely promising work permits to Slovakia. The court found a strong prima facie case under BNS sections 318(4) and 3(5), noting the economic fraud against 55 victims, the accused's lack of cooperation with investigation, their status as non-residents in different states creating flight risk, and the company's closure immediately after the complaint—factors warranting custody rather than bail. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Court Decision Summary The Rajkot Sessions Court rejected the anticipatory bail application of four directors of Aramfly Private Limited accused of cheating immigration consultancy clients of ₹2.68 crore by falsely promising work permits to Slovakia. The court found a strong prima facie case under BNS sections 318(4) and 3(5), noting the economic fraud against 55 victims, the accused's lack of cooperation with investigation, their status as non-residents in different states creating flight risk, and the company's closure immediately after the complaint—factors warranting custody rather than bail. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT RAJKOT All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case