DUDABHAI PUJABHAI PIPROTAR 4,91,000 vs JAYANTILAL R.PATEL Advocate - K K ADESARA — 196/2018
Case under Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138,. Status: EVIDENCE OF COMPLAINANT. Next hearing: 05th May 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJMR060012312018
Next Hearing
05th May 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
196/2018
Filing Date
19-06-2018
Registration No
196/2018
Registration Date
19-06-2018
Court
TALUKA COURT, HALVAD
Judge
33-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND ADDL. CJM
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
DUDABHAI PUJABHAI PIPROTAR 4,91,000
Adv. J R DAVE
Respondent(s)
JAYANTILAL R.PATEL Advocate - K K ADESARA
Hearing History
Judge: 33-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND ADDL. CJM
EVIDENCE OF COMPLAINANT
FINAL ARGUMENTS
FINAL ARGUMENTS
FINAL ARGUMENTS
EVIDENCE OF DEFENCE
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 28-04-2026 | EVIDENCE OF COMPLAINANT | |
| 27-04-2026 | FINAL ARGUMENTS | |
| 20-04-2026 | FINAL ARGUMENTS | |
| 13-04-2026 | FINAL ARGUMENTS | |
| 06-04-2026 | EVIDENCE OF DEFENCE |
Interim Orders
Summary Case No. C.C.NO.196-2018 The petition filed by the accused under the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 seeking to stay proceedings in all cheque bounce cases is dismissed. The court rejected the petitioner's argument that criminal proceedings cannot be initiated under Section 138 of the NI Act when an interim moratorium has been imposed, holding that the case is criminal in nature and maintaining the integrity of banking transactions requires proceeding with the cheque bounce action. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary Case No. C.C.NO.196-2018 The petition filed by the accused under the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 seeking to stay proceedings in all cheque bounce cases is dismissed. The court rejected the petitioner's argument that criminal proceedings cannot be initiated under Section 138 of the NI Act when an interim moratorium has been imposed, holding that the case is criminal in nature and maintaining the integrity of banking transactions requires proceeding with the cheque bounce action. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts