JUNEDBHAI JAVEDBHAI JAINDANI vs Government of Gujarat Advocate - DGP — 225/2026

Case under The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 482,. Disposed: Contested--REJECTED on 09th March 2026.

CRMA S - CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION - SESSIONS

CNR: GJSN010004652026

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

225/2026

Filing Date

02-03-2026

Registration No

225/2026

Registration Date

02-03-2026

Court

DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT SURENDRANAGAR

Judge

3-6th ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE

Decision Date

09th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--REJECTED

Acts & Sections

THE BHARATIYA NAGARIK SURAKSHA SANHITA, 2023 Section 482,
THE BHARATIYA NYAYA SANHITA, 2023 Section 316(5),54,

Petitioner(s)

JUNEDBHAI JAVEDBHAI JAINDANI

Adv. M R BHATTI

Respondent(s)

Government of Gujarat Advocate - DGP

Hearing History

Judge: 3-6th ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE

09-03-2026

Disposed

06-03-2026

HEARING

Final Orders / Judgements

09-03-2026
JUDEGEMENT

Court Decision Summary CRMA NO.225/2026 | 6th Additional Sessions Judge, Surendranagar The court rejected the anticipatory bail petition of accused Junedabhai Javedbhai Jeedani, who was charged under IPC Section 406 (criminal breach of trust) and 34. The accused, along with co-accused employees of RBS Capital Finance, allegedly defrauded customers by approving loans without disbursing funds and misappropriating Rs. 35,93,774. The court found substantial grounds for investigation, potential witness tampering risks, and the possibility of flight, making bail detention appropriate at this investigative stage. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Court Decision Summary CRMA NO.225/2026 | 6th Additional Sessions Judge, Surendranagar The court rejected the anticipatory bail petition of accused Junedabhai Javedbhai Jeedani, who was charged under IPC Section 406 (criminal breach of trust) and 34. The accused, along with co-accused employees of RBS Capital Finance, allegedly defrauded customers by approving loans without disbursing funds and misappropriating Rs. 35,93,774. The court found substantial grounds for investigation, potential witness tampering risks, and the possibility of flight, making bail detention appropriate at this investigative stage. 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 SURENDRANAGAR All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case