NITESHPURI PARBATPURI GAUSWAMI vs KARAN MAFABHAI GOHIL Advocate - N M BATUA — 15837/2025

Case under Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138. Disposed: Uncontested--LOK ADALAT on 14th March 2026.

Case disposedSub Stage

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJBK020265532025

Filing Number

15837/2025

Filing Date

27-Oct-2025

Registration No

15837/2025

Registration Date

27-Oct-2025

Court

CIVIL COURT PALANPUR

Judge

2-6th Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.

Decision Date

14-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--LOK ADALAT

Last updated 06-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.NITESHPURI PARBATPURI GAUSWAMI

    Adv. R A GAUSWAMI

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.KARAN MAFABHAI GOHIL Advocate - N M BATUA

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

    The court dismissed the criminal case after finding that all relationships mentioned in the FIR were intact and there was no basis to proceed further. The court held that since the accused had maintained proper conduct and the complainant's concerns lacked substantiation, the matter did not warrant continuation of criminal proceedings and ordered the case closed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 14-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    6th Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.

  4. 13-Mar-2026

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    6th Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.

  5. 10-Mar-2026

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    6th Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.

  6. 10-Feb-2026

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    6th Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.

  7. 08-Jan-2026

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    6th Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.

  8. 18-Dec-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    5th Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.

  9. 28-Nov-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  10. 27-Oct-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. 15837/2025

casestatus.in Summary

The court dismissed the criminal case after finding that all relationships mentioned in the FIR were intact and there was no basis to proceed further. The court held that since the accused had maintained proper conduct and the complainant's concerns lacked substantiation, the matter did not warrant continuation of criminal proceedings and ordered the case closed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case