USHA VENKATARAMAN vs CCB Tambaram — 210/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 497,503. Disposed: Uncontested--Dismissed on 16th April 2026.

CRLMP - Criminal Miscellaneous Petition

CNR: TNCG060007212026

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

04-02-2026

Filing Number

717/2026

Filing Date

07-02-2026

Registration No

210/2026

Registration Date

07-02-2026

Court

Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Chengalpet

Judge

9-Judicial Magistrate-II, Chengalpattu

Decision Date

16th April 2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--Dismissed

FIR Details

FIR Number

00

Police Station

CCB, TAMBARAM

Year

0

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 497,503

Petitioner(s)

USHA VENKATARAMAN

Adv. ANBARASU K

Respondent(s)

CCB Tambaram

Hearing History

Judge: 9-Judicial Magistrate-II, Chengalpattu

16-04-2026

Disposed

10-04-2026

Enquiry

06-04-2026

Enquiry

24-03-2026

Enquiry

16-03-2026

Enquiry

Final Orders / Judgements

16-04-2026
Copy of Order

Case Summary: Usha Venkataraman v. CCB Tambaram (Crl.M.P. No.210/2026) Decision: The court dismissed Usha Venkataraman's petition seeking return of Rs.8,46,084/- from a frozen bank account used in an online fraud scheme where she lost Rs.30,00,000/-. Key Reasoning: The court held that in cyber fraud cases, frozen accounts typically contain commingled funds from multiple victims. Without a complete money trail analysis and bank transaction records proving the petitioner's specific amount is identifiable in the frozen account, directing release could prejudice other victims' rights. The petitioner failed to establish prima facie entitlement to the claimed amount. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: Usha Venkataraman v. CCB Tambaram (Crl.M.P. No.210/2026) Decision: The court dismissed Usha Venkataraman's petition seeking return of Rs.8,46,084/- from a frozen bank account used in an online fraud scheme where she lost Rs.30,00,000/-. Key Reasoning: The court held that in cyber fraud cases, frozen accounts typically contain commingled funds from multiple victims. Without a complete money trail analysis and bank transaction records proving the petitioner's specific amount is identifiable in the frozen account, directing release could prejudice other victims' rights. The petitioner failed to establish prima facie entitlement to the claimed amount. 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

Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Chengalpet All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case