MANOJ TRADING COMPANY, PROPRITER, MANOJKUMAR SANABHAI PARAJAPATIi vs SWASTIK PROTEINS PROPRITER CHUNIBHAI RAVAJIBHAI RAKHOLIA Advocate - D D RUPARELIA — 162/2025
Case under The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 415. Disposed: Contested--JUDGEMENT on 10th April 2026.
CR A - CRIMINAL APPEAL
CNR: GJJN010026512025
Filing Number
162/2025
Filing Date
26-12-2025
Registration No
162/2025
Registration Date
26-12-2025
Court
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT JUNAGADH
Judge
1-PRINCIPAL DISTRICT JUDGE
Decision Date
10th April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGEMENT
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
MANOJ TRADING COMPANY, PROPRITER, MANOJKUMAR SANABHAI PARAJAPATIi
Adv. K S BORICHANGAR
Respondent(s)
SWASTIK PROTEINS PROPRITER CHUNIBHAI RAVAJIBHAI RAKHOLIA Advocate - D D RUPARELIA
Government of Gujarat
Adv. M P VAGHELA
Hearing History
Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL DISTRICT JUDGE
Disposed
ORDER
ORDER
ORDER
FINAL HEARING
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 10-04-2026 | Disposed |
| 30-03-2026 | ORDER |
| 16-03-2026 | ORDER |
| 13-03-2026 | ORDER |
| 28-02-2026 | FINAL HEARING |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: Criminal Appeal 162/2025 Court's Decision: The appellate court set aside the trial court's conviction and sentence against the appellant (Manoj Trading Company's proprietor). The court found serious procedural irregularities: the accused's cross-examination was not conducted despite being afforded opportunity, he remained absent for extended periods without proper warrant enforcement, and the trial court failed to properly evaluate evidence before convicting him under the Negotiable Instruments Act Section 138. The court remanded the case for retrial with directions for proper cross-examination of the complainant, fresh evidence presentation by both parties, and judicial discretion on bail conditions. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
Case Summary: Criminal Appeal 162/2025 Court's Decision: The appellate court set aside the trial court's conviction and sentence against the appellant (Manoj Trading Company's proprietor). The court found serious procedural irregularities: the accused's cross-examination was not conducted despite being afforded opportunity, he remained absent for extended periods without proper warrant enforcement, and the trial court failed to properly evaluate evidence before convicting him under the Negotiable Instruments Act Section 138. The court remanded the case for retrial with directions for proper cross-examination of the complainant, fresh evidence presentation by both parties, and judicial discretion on bail conditions. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts