BHARATBHAI RANCHODBHAI SORATHIYA(S.B.I. FIN.PROPARAYT vs SUNILBHAI SHIVRAMBHAI ROKIYA Advocate - D A MALVANIYA — 686/2024
Case under Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY CONVICTION on 14th May 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJBT030011882024
Filing Number
686/2024
Filing Date
16-03-2024
Registration No
686/2024
Registration Date
16-03-2024
Court
TALUKA COURT, GADHADA
Judge
1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Decision Date
14th May 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY CONVICTION
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
BHARATBHAI RANCHODBHAI SORATHIYA(S.B.I. FIN.PROPARAYT
Adv. D Y DAVE
Respondent(s)
SUNILBHAI SHIVRAMBHAI ROKIYA Advocate - D A MALVANIYA
Hearing History
Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Disposed
JUDGEMENT
FINAL ARGUMENTS
FINAL ARGUMENTS
FINAL ARGUMENTS
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 14-05-2026 | Disposed |
| 08-05-2026 | JUDGEMENT |
| 09-04-2026 | FINAL ARGUMENTS |
| 16-03-2026 | FINAL ARGUMENTS |
| 02-03-2026 | FINAL ARGUMENTS |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: 686/2024 Court Decision: The Judicial Magistrate convicted respondent Sunil Shivram Rokiya under the Negotiable Instruments Act for dishonoring a check worth ₹60,000. The court found that the respondent fraudulently obtained the check from the complainant (petitioner/financial company) by misrepresenting loan details, failed to honor it despite timely notice, and made false claims about proprietary interests. Respondent sentenced to one year imprisonment under NI Act Section 138 with fine/alternate imprisonment, plus additional penalties. Key Reasoning: The court rejected the respondent's defense claims about insufficient funds and lack of proper check custody. Evidence showed the check was presented within validity period but dishonored due to inadequate balance—a direct violation of the NI Act's presumptions favoring the complainant. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: 686/2024 Court Decision: The Judicial Magistrate convicted respondent Sunil Shivram Rokiya under the Negotiable Instruments Act for dishonoring a check worth ₹60,000. The court found that the respondent fraudulently obtained the check from the complainant (petitioner/financial company) by misrepresenting loan details, failed to honor it despite timely notice, and made false claims about proprietary interests. Respondent sentenced to one year imprisonment under NI Act Section 138 with fine/alternate imprisonment, plus additional penalties. Key Reasoning: The court rejected the respondent's defense claims about insufficient funds and lack of proper check custody. Evidence showed the check was presented within validity period but dishonored due to inadequate balance—a direct violation of the NI Act's presumptions favoring the complainant. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts