SINDHU RAMCHANDRABHAI BODANA vs GOVERNMENT OF GUJARAT — 668/2026

Case under The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 483. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 12th March 2026.

CRMA S - CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION - SESSIONS

CNR: GJRJ010017882026

Case disposed

Filing Number

668/2026

Filing Date

06-03-2026

Registration No

668/2026

Registration Date

06-03-2026

Court

DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT RAJKOT

Judge

2-9th ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE

Decision Date

12th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED

FIR Details

FIR Number

11201018260009

Police Station

CID CYBER CRIME POLICE STATION - GANDHINAGAR DISTRICT

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

THE BHARATIYA NAGARIK SURAKSHA SANHITA, 2023 Section 483
THE BHARATIYA NYAYA SANHITA, 2023 Section 316(5),318(4),317(2),61(2)
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY ACT, 2000 Section 66,C,66D

Petitioner(s)

SINDHU RAMCHANDRABHAI BODANA

Adv. A N JANANI

Respondent(s)

GOVERNMENT OF GUJARAT

Hearing History

Judge: 2-9th ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE

12-03-2026

Disposed

11-03-2026

HEARING

10-03-2026

HEARING

Final Orders / Judgements

12-03-2026
JUDEGEMENT

Court Decision Summary The 9th Additional Sessions Judge at Rajkot granted regular bail to applicant Sindhu S/o. Ramchandra Bodana in a crypto fraud case involving ₹3.16 crore. The court found that while the applicant was implicated based on a witness statement, there was insufficient prima facie evidence of his direct involvement—he allegedly received only ₹4,400 with no proven economic benefits. The judge noted the investigation was likely complete since arrest (12-02-2026), making continued detention pretrial punishment, especially given the applicant's lack of criminal antecedents. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Court Decision Summary The 9th Additional Sessions Judge at Rajkot granted regular bail to applicant Sindhu S/o. Ramchandra Bodana in a crypto fraud case involving ₹3.16 crore. The court found that while the applicant was implicated based on a witness statement, there was insufficient prima facie evidence of his direct involvement—he allegedly received only ₹4,400 with no proven economic benefits. The judge noted the investigation was likely complete since arrest (12-02-2026), making continued detention pretrial punishment, especially given the applicant's lack of criminal antecedents. 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