DARSHAN VINODBHAI KHACHARIYA vs GOVERNMENT OF GUJARAT Advocate - DGP — 654/2026
Case under The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 482. Disposed: Contested--REJECTED on 18th March 2026.
CRMA S - CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION - SESSIONS
CNR: GJRJ010017462026
Filing Number
654/2026
Filing Date
03-03-2026
Registration No
654/2026
Registration Date
03-03-2026
Court
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT RAJKOT
Judge
9-ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE
Decision Date
18th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--REJECTED
FIR Details
FIR Number
11208057250063
Police Station
CYBER CRIME POLICE STATION RAJKOT ZONE-RAJKOT DISTRICT
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
DARSHAN VINODBHAI KHACHARIYA
Adv. R P ZALA
Respondent(s)
GOVERNMENT OF GUJARAT Advocate - DGP
Hearing History
Judge: 9-ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE
Disposed
HEARING
HEARING
HEARING
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 18-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 17-03-2026 | HEARING |
| 16-03-2026 | HEARING |
| 11-03-2026 | HEARING |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The Rajkot Additional Sessions Court rejected the anticipatory bail application (CRMA No. 654/2026) of the accused Darshan Nivodbhai Khachhariya in a cyber fraud case. The court found the allegations constitute a serious instance of cyber fraud involving digital arrest scam, where the accused allegedly impersonated police officials, made fake documents from Supreme Court and Reserve Bank of India, and extorted Rs. 1,14,55,000 from the complainant. The court held that granting anticipatory bail at this stage would impede investigation, particularly when custodial interrogation is necessary to unearth the modus operandi and larger conspiracy. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The Rajkot Additional Sessions Court rejected the anticipatory bail application (CRMA No. 654/2026) of the accused Darshan Nivodbhai Khachhariya in a cyber fraud case. The court found the allegations constitute a serious instance of cyber fraud involving digital arrest scam, where the accused allegedly impersonated police officials, made fake documents from Supreme Court and Reserve Bank of India, and extorted Rs. 1,14,55,000 from the complainant. The court held that granting anticipatory bail at this stage would impede investigation, particularly when custodial interrogation is necessary to unearth the modus operandi and larger conspiracy. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts