NARAYAN KRUPA FINANCE NA PARTNER PATEL CHETANKUMAR VINUBHAI vs ZALA SURESHSINH AMARSINH Advocate - S D ZALA — 887/2025

Case under Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138,142. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY CONVICTION on 24th April 2026.

Case disposed

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJAR070012322025

Filing Number

887/2025

Filing Date

02-Jul-2025

Registration No

887/2025

Registration Date

02-Jul-2025

Court

TALUKA COURT, BAYAD

Judge

4-Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

Decision Date

24-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--JUDGMENT BY CONVICTION

Last updated 07-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138,142

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.NARAYAN KRUPA FINANCE NA PARTNER PATEL CHETANKUMAR VINUBHAI

    Adv. D R PATEL

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.ZALA SURESHSINH AMARSINH Advocate - S D ZALA

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 24-Apr-2026

    JudegementView PDF

    Case Summary: 887/2025 Court Decision: The court convicted the defendant (Zala Sureshsinh Amarsinh) under the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Section 138 for dishonoring a cheque. The defendant had received a loan of ₹95,000 from Narayan Krupa Finance and issued cheque no. 000002 for ₹86,000 on 22/04/2025, which was returned unpaid with the note "Account is Dormant and There is No Balance." Despite receiving legal notice, the defendant failed to repay the amount, establishing criminal liability under the statutory presumption that cheques are drawn for valid consideration unless proven otherwise. Sentence: One year simple imprisonment and compensation of ₹86,000 to the complainant, payable monthly; additional three months imprisonment if payment remains outstanding. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 24-Apr-2026

    Disposed

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  4. 15-Apr-2026

    Judgement

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  5. 07-Apr-2026

    For Arguement of Asscused

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  6. 23-Mar-2026

    Evidence Of Complainant

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  7. 13-Mar-2026

    Evidence Of Complainant

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  8. 09-Mar-2026

    Evidence Of Complainant

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  9. 17-Feb-2026

    Evidence Of Complainant

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  10. 17-Jan-2026

    Evidence Of Complainant

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  11. 12-Dec-2025

    Evidence Of Complainant

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  12. 09-Dec-2025

    Evidence Of Complainant

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  13. 26-Nov-2025

    Evidence Of Complainant

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  14. 15-Nov-2025

    Evidence Of Complainant

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  15. 28-Oct-2025

    Evidence Of Complainant

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  16. 17-Oct-2025

    Evidence Of Complainant

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  17. 16-Sep-2025

    Evidence Of Complainant

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  18. 01-Sep-2025

    Evidence Of Complainant

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  19. 11-Aug-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  20. 02-Jul-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. 887/2025

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: 887/2025 Court Decision: The court convicted the defendant (Zala Sureshsinh Amarsinh) under the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Section 138 for dishonoring a cheque. The defendant had received a loan of ₹95,000 from Narayan Krupa Finance and issued cheque no. 000002 for ₹86,000 on 22/04/2025, which was returned unpaid with the note "Account is Dormant and There is No Balance." Despite receiving legal notice, the defendant failed to repay the amount, establishing criminal liability under the statutory presumption that cheques are drawn for valid consideration unless proven otherwise. Sentence: One year simple imprisonment and compensation of ₹86,000 to the complainant, payable monthly; additional three months imprisonment if payment remains outstanding. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case