JARINABANU SABIRKHAN PATHAN vs NIL BHADRESHKUMAR PATEL Advocate - 1469/2002 — 162/2024

Case under Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138,. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY CONVICTION on 01st April 2026.

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJKH090002212024

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

162/2024

Filing Date

12-03-2024

Registration No

162/2024

Registration Date

12-03-2024

Court

TALUKA COURT, MAHUDHA

Judge

1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C

Decision Date

01st April 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--JUDGMENT BY CONVICTION

Acts & Sections

NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT, 1881 Section 138,

Petitioner(s)

JARINABANU SABIRKHAN PATHAN

Adv. A B KALYANI

Respondent(s)

NIL BHADRESHKUMAR PATEL Advocate - 1469/2002

Hearing History

Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C

01-04-2026

Disposed

10-03-2026

FINAL ARGUMENTS

09-03-2026

EVIDENCE OF DEFENCE

23-02-2026

EVIDENCE OF DEFENCE

17-02-2026

EVIDENCE OF DEFENCE

Final Orders / Judgements

01-04-2026
JUDEGEMENT

Summary The Mehsana First Class Magistrate Court convicted accused Nihal Badreshkumar Patel under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 for dishonoring a cheque. The complainant loaned ₹2,00,000 to the accused for business purposes; the accused issued a cheque which was dishonored due to insufficient funds. Despite legal notice, the accused failed to repay the amount. The court found the complainant's evidence credible and the statutory presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 of the NI Act favored the complainant. The accused neither appeared to contest nor provided rebuttal evidence. The court sentenced the accused to three months imprisonment with compensation of ₹2,00,000 to the complainant, and an additional three months imprisonment if compensation remains unpaid. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The Mehsana First Class Magistrate Court convicted accused Nihal Badreshkumar Patel under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 for dishonoring a cheque. The complainant loaned ₹2,00,000 to the accused for business purposes; the accused issued a cheque which was dishonored due to insufficient funds. Despite legal notice, the accused failed to repay the amount. The court found the complainant's evidence credible and the statutory presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 of the NI Act favored the complainant. The accused neither appeared to contest nor provided rebuttal evidence. The court sentenced the accused to three months imprisonment with compensation of ₹2,00,000 to the complainant, and an additional three months imprisonment if compensation remains unpaid. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

TALUKA COURT, MAHUDHA All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case