MUKESH MOHANBHAI CHAUHAN vs RAVI PRABHUDAS BRAHMBHATT Advocate - D M BRAHMBHATT — 114/2026

Case under Code of Criminal Procedure Section 374(3). Disposed: Uncontested--LOK ADALAT on 14th March 2026.

Case disposed

CR A - CRIMINAL APPEAL

CNR: GJKH010014392026

Filing Number

114/2026

Filing Date

07-Mar-2026

Registration No

114/2026

Registration Date

07-Mar-2026

Court

DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT NADIAD

Judge

1-Principal District Judge

Decision Date

14-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--LOK ADALAT

Last updated 27-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Criminal Procedure Section 374(3)
The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 415
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.MUKESH MOHANBHAI CHAUHAN

    Adv. P M ROHIT

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.RAVI PRABHUDAS BRAHMBHATT Advocate - D M BRAHMBHATT

  2. 2.STATE OF GUJARAT

    Adv. D R BAROT

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

    The court dismissed the appeal filed by Mukesh Mohanbhai Chauhan against the lower court's conviction order dated 09/02/2026, which imposed one month imprisonment, a fine of Rs. 3,000, and additional penalties. However, during the appeal proceedings, a settlement was reached between the appellant and respondent, with the appellant paying the required cheque amount, and the court noted no outstanding criminal liability remained, permitting the lower court judgment to stand while vacating the conviction order based on the settlement reached under the Negotiable Instruments Act. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 14-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Principal District Judge

  4. 12-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  5. 07-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 114/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The court dismissed the appeal filed by Mukesh Mohanbhai Chauhan against the lower court's conviction order dated 09/02/2026, which imposed one month imprisonment, a fine of Rs. 3,000, and additional penalties. However, during the appeal proceedings, a settlement was reached between the appellant and respondent, with the appellant paying the required cheque amount, and the court noted no outstanding criminal liability remained, permitting the lower court judgment to stand while vacating the conviction order based on the settlement reached under the Negotiable Instruments Act. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case