DHUMAL AKSHAYKUMAR DINESHBHAI vs DIPESHBHAI DEVENDRABHAI PANCHAL — 24/2026

Case under Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 07th March 2026.

Case disposed

CR EN - CRIMINAL ENQUIRY

CNR: GJDH020012852026

Filing Number

24/2026

Filing Date

04-Feb-2026

Registration No

24/2026

Registration Date

04-Feb-2026

Court

CIVIL COURT DAHOD

Judge

1-Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

Decision Date

07-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED

Last updated 03-Apr-2026

Acts & Sections

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.DHUMAL AKSHAYKUMAR DINESHBHAI

    Adv. K T CHANDWANI

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.DIPESHBHAI DEVENDRABHAI PANCHAL

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 07-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

    Summary The court (Principal Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dahod) found sufficient prima facie evidence of an offense under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (dishonored cheque case). The complainant alleged the accused borrowed ₹7,50,000 and issued a check for ₹4,50,000 that was returned unpaid; despite legal notice, the accused failed to repay. The court ordered registration of a criminal case, issuance of summons to the accused, and directed the accused to furnish bail of ₹19,000 with a personal recognizance bond of equal amount. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 07-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  4. 04-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 24/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The court (Principal Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dahod) found sufficient prima facie evidence of an offense under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (dishonored cheque case). The complainant alleged the accused borrowed ₹7,50,000 and issued a check for ₹4,50,000 that was returned unpaid; despite legal notice, the accused failed to repay. The court ordered registration of a criminal case, issuance of summons to the accused, and directed the accused to furnish bail of ₹19,000 with a personal recognizance bond of equal amount. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case