Vishal ur Visshu vs State Advocate - Public Prosecutor — 111/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483,. Disposed: Contested--Bail Refused on 10th March 2026.

Bail Application

CNR: RJBD010004692026

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

362/2026

Filing Date

27-02-2026

Registration No

111/2026

Registration Date

27-02-2026

Court

DJ ADJ Bundi HQ

Judge

1-District and Sessions Judge

Decision Date

10th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Bail Refused

FIR Details

FIR Number

1

Police Station

Cyber Thana Bundi

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483,

Petitioner(s)

Vishal ur Visshu

Adv. Rajkumar Dadhich

Respondent(s)

State Advocate - Public Prosecutor

Hearing History

Judge: 1-District and Sessions Judge

10-03-2026

Disposed

09-03-2026

Orders

05-03-2026

Arguments on Applications / Bail Applications / Arguments in Misc. Proceedings

04-03-2026

Arguments on Applications / Bail Applications / Arguments in Misc. Proceedings

Final Orders / Judgements

10-03-2026
Judgement

Court Decision Summary The Session Court of Bundi, Rajasthan rejected the bail application of Vishal Momtiya (accused in a cyber fraud case involving ₹2.44 crore) filed under Section 483 CrPC. The court found that the accused, along with co-accused, conspired to defraud the complainant by opening bank accounts in his company's name and conducting illegal transactions using cyber fraud techniques, constituting serious offenses under Sections 318(4), 319(2), 61(2) IPC and Section 66 IT Act, 2008. The court emphasized the gravity of cyber crimes affecting public trust and the accused's prior criminal background, holding that bail was unwarranted. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Court Decision Summary The Session Court of Bundi, Rajasthan rejected the bail application of Vishal Momtiya (accused in a cyber fraud case involving ₹2.44 crore) filed under Section 483 CrPC. The court found that the accused, along with co-accused, conspired to defraud the complainant by opening bank accounts in his company's name and conducting illegal transactions using cyber fraud techniques, constituting serious offenses under Sections 318(4), 319(2), 61(2) IPC and Section 66 IT Act, 2008. The court emphasized the gravity of cyber crimes affecting public trust and the accused's prior criminal background, holding that bail was unwarranted. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

DJ ADJ Bundi HQ All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case