GAUMOR BRASS PRODUCTS THROUGH NILESHBHAI TEJABHAI BHANDERI vs NARENDRASINH ANOPSINH ZALA Advocate - V G GOHIL — 7872/2024
Case under Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 30th May 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJJM020115402024
Filing Number
7872/2024
Filing Date
30-Jul-2024
Registration No
7872/2024
Registration Date
30-Jul-2024
Court
CIVIL COURT JAMNAGAR
Judge
6-2nd Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.
Decision Date
30-May-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL
Last updated 12-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.GAUMOR BRASS PRODUCTS THROUGH NILESHBHAI TEJABHAI BHANDERI
Adv. N P GHADIA
Respondent(s)
-
1.NARENDRASINH ANOPSINH ZALA Advocate - V G GOHIL
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
30-May-2026
JudegementView PDF
Summary of Criminal Case No. 7872/2024 Decision: The court acquitted the accused (Narendrasinh Anopsinh Zala) under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. Key Finding: Although the complainant (Gaumor Brass Products through Nileshbhai Tejabhai Bhanderi) established that a cheque for Rs. 32,50,000 was issued and dishonoured, the court found that the accused had partially paid Rs. 5,00,000 before the cheque was presented. This partial payment, combined with insufficient evidence proving a complete legally enforceable debt at the time of dishonour, created reasonable doubt about the accused's guilt under the mandatory presumption framework of Section 139 of the Act. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
30-May-2026
Disposed
2nd Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.
-
15-May-2026
Final Arguments
4th Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.
-
01-May-2026
Final Arguments
4th Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.
-
20-Apr-2026
Final Arguments
4th Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.
-
01-Apr-2026
Final Arguments
4th Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.
-
16-Mar-2026
Final Arguments
4th Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.
-
06-Mar-2026
Final Arguments
4th Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.
-
27-Feb-2026
Final Arguments
4th Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.
-
13-Feb-2026
Final Arguments
4th Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.
-
21-Jan-2026
Final Arguments
4th Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.
-
02-Jan-2026
Final Arguments
4th Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.
-
16-Dec-2025
Final Arguments
4th Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.
-
25-Nov-2025
Final Arguments
4th Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.
-
29-Oct-2025
Final Arguments
4th Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.
-
03-Oct-2025
Final Arguments
4th Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.
-
19-Sep-2025
Final Arguments
4th Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.
-
04-Sep-2025
Final Arguments
4th Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.
-
20-Aug-2025
Further Statement
4th Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.
-
29-Jul-2025
Further Statement
4th Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.
-
21-Jul-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
4th Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.
-
21-Jun-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
4th Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.
-
20-Jun-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
4th Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.
-
30-May-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
4th Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.
-
30-Apr-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
5th Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.
-
15-Mar-2025
Process To Accused
5th Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.
-
09-Jan-2025
Process To Accused
5th Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.
-
28-Oct-2024
Process To Accused
5th Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.
-
17-Sep-2024
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
30-Jul-2024
Case filed
Registration No. 7872/2024
Summary of Criminal Case No. 7872/2024 Decision: The court acquitted the accused (Narendrasinh Anopsinh Zala) under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. Key Finding: Although the complainant (Gaumor Brass Products through Nileshbhai Tejabhai Bhanderi) established that a cheque for Rs. 32,50,000 was issued and dishonoured, the court found that the accused had partially paid Rs. 5,00,000 before the cheque was presented. This partial payment, combined with insufficient evidence proving a complete legally enforceable debt at the time of dishonour, created reasonable doubt about the accused's guilt under the mandatory presumption framework of Section 139 of the Act. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts