SOLANKI MANZILKUMAR RATILAL vs RATHOD RAJESHKUMAR PRAVINBHAI Advocate - J S OJHA — 19/2026
Case under The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 415. Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 13th March 2026.
CR A - CRIMINAL APPEAL
CNR: GJMH010001772026
Filing Number
19/2026
Filing Date
15-Jan-2026
Registration No
19/2026
Registration Date
15-Jan-2026
Court
DISTRICT COURT MAHESANA
Judge
1-Principal District Judge
Decision Date
13-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISMISSED
Last updated 13-Apr-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.SOLANKI MANZILKUMAR RATILAL
Adv. A A YADAV
Respondent(s)
-
1.RATHOD RAJESHKUMAR PRAVINBHAI Advocate - J S OJHA
-
2.THE STATE OF GUJARAT
Adv. B G PATEL
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
13-Mar-2026
JudegementView PDF
Court Decision Summary The Sessions Judge dismissed the appellant's criminal appeal against his conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The court confirmed the trial court's findings that the accused obtained a ₹2,00,000 hand loan, issued a cheque that bounced due to insufficient funds, and failed to make payment despite receiving a legal demand notice. The court upheld the conviction and sentence of one-year imprisonment with ₹2,00,000 compensation, noting the accused deliberately absented himself from trial proceedings despite ample opportunities to cross-examine the complainant and present his defense. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
13-Mar-2026
Disposed
Principal District Judge
-
12-Mar-2026
Judgement
Principal District Judge
-
07-Mar-2026
Judgement
Principal District Judge
-
05-Mar-2026
Final Hearing
Principal District Judge
-
25-Feb-2026
Final Hearing
Principal District Judge
-
07-Feb-2026
Final Hearing
Principal District Judge
-
20-Jan-2026
Final Hearing
Principal District Judge
-
17-Jan-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
15-Jan-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 19/2026
Court Decision Summary The Sessions Judge dismissed the appellant's criminal appeal against his conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The court confirmed the trial court's findings that the accused obtained a ₹2,00,000 hand loan, issued a cheque that bounced due to insufficient funds, and failed to make payment despite receiving a legal demand notice. The court upheld the conviction and sentence of one-year imprisonment with ₹2,00,000 compensation, noting the accused deliberately absented himself from trial proceedings despite ample opportunities to cross-examine the complainant and present his defense. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts