BHARATBHAI MANSUKHBHAI RATHOD vs JAYDIPBHAI VITHALBHAI UDESHI — 1546/2025
Case under Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY CONVICTION on 08th May 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJJM110018772025
Filing Number
1546/2025
Filing Date
27-Oct-2025
Registration No
1546/2025
Registration Date
27-Oct-2025
Court
TALUKA COURT, KALAVAD
Judge
1-Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
Decision Date
08-May-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY CONVICTION
Last updated 24-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.BHARATBHAI MANSUKHBHAI RATHOD
Adv. J S PARMAR
Respondent(s)
-
1.JAYDIPBHAI VITHALBHAI UDESHI
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
08-May-2026
JudegementView PDF
Summary of Case 1546/2025 Petitioner: Bharatbhai Mansukhbhai Rathod Respondent: Jaydipbhai Vithalbhai Udeshi The court convicted the accused under the Negotiable Instruments Act Section 138 for issuing a cheque of Rs. 8,27,590 that bounced due to insufficient funds. The accused failed to rebut statutory presumptions of consideration and debt despite having the burden to do so, and provided no credible defense. The court sentenced the accused to one year imprisonment and ordered compensation of Rs. 8,27,590 to the complainant within one month, with additional imprisonment if payment defaults. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
08-May-2026
Disposed
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
01-May-2026
Final Arguments
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
17-Apr-2026
Further Statement
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
20-Mar-2026
Process To Accused
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
13-Feb-2026
Process To Accused
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
16-Jan-2026
Process To Accused
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
28-Nov-2025
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
27-Oct-2025
Case filed
Registration No. 1546/2025
Summary of Case 1546/2025 Petitioner: Bharatbhai Mansukhbhai Rathod Respondent: Jaydipbhai Vithalbhai Udeshi The court convicted the accused under the Negotiable Instruments Act Section 138 for issuing a cheque of Rs. 8,27,590 that bounced due to insufficient funds. The accused failed to rebut statutory presumptions of consideration and debt despite having the burden to do so, and provided no credible defense. The court sentenced the accused to one year imprisonment and ordered compensation of Rs. 8,27,590 to the complainant within one month, with additional imprisonment if payment defaults. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts