SOHAN LAL vs NEELAM DEVI AND ANR. — 137/2025

Case under Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138. Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 16th March 2026.

CA - CRIMINAL APPEAL

CNR: DLND010028572025

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

15-04-2025

Filing Number

1155/2025

Filing Date

21-04-2025

Registration No

137/2025

Registration Date

29-04-2025

Court

District and Sessions Judge,New Delhi, PHC

Judge

10-Additional Sessions Judge (SFTC)

Decision Date

16th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISMISSED

Acts & Sections

Negotiable Instruments Act Section 138

Petitioner(s)

SOHAN LAL

Adv. DEV PRAKASH PACHAURI

Respondent(s)

NEELAM DEVI AND ANR.

Hearing History

Judge: 10-Additional Sessions Judge (SFTC)

16-03-2026

Disposed

14-03-2026

Judgement

02-03-2026

Judgement

25-02-2026

Judgement

19-01-2026

Judgement

Final Orders / Judgements

16-03-2026
COPY OF ORDER
16-03-2026
COPY OF JUDGMENT

Case Summary: Sohan Lal v. Neelam Devi (137/2025) The court dismissed Sohan Lal's appeal against his conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for issuing a dishonored cheque worth ₹2,50,000. The court found that Lal failed to substantiate his defense that he had borrowed only ₹50,000 and already repaid it, noting he produced no written loan agreement, no evidence of payment, and inconsistencies between his testimony and his witness's account. The court upheld the trial court's conviction and fine of ₹3,70,000. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Interim Orders

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: Sohan Lal v. Neelam Devi (137/2025) The court dismissed Sohan Lal's appeal against his conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for issuing a dishonored cheque worth ₹2,50,000. The court found that Lal failed to substantiate his defense that he had borrowed only ₹50,000 and already repaid it, noting he produced no written loan agreement, no evidence of payment, and inconsistencies between his testimony and his witness's account. The court upheld the trial court's conviction and fine of ₹3,70,000. 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

District and Sessions Judge,New Delhi, PHC All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case