State Bank Of India Through Authorized officer Gajendra singh Rajawat vs Chiragbharthi Rashikbharthi Gauswami Advocate - K B JOSHI — 4792/2024

Case under Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 18th April 2026.

Case disposed

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJPB020060932024

Filing Number

4792/2024

Filing Date

04-Oct-2024

Registration No

4792/2024

Registration Date

04-Oct-2024

Court

CIVIL COURT PORBANDAR

Judge

1-Principal Senior CIVIL Judge

Decision Date

18-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL

Last updated 15-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.State Bank Of India Through Authorized officer Gajendra singh Rajawat

    Adv. D B TERIYA

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Chiragbharthi Rashikbharthi Gauswami Advocate - K B JOSHI

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 18-Apr-2026

    OrderView PDF

    Summary The court acquitted the accused in a cheque dishonor case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, holding that the cheque was issued as security for a loan and the loan agreement was determined when the bank repossessed the mortgaged property, making the cheque an instrument without consideration. The court reasoned that once the financial institution exercised its option to repossess the vehicle/property, the underlying debt obligation ceased, and therefore demanding payment on the dishonored cheque violated principles of Section 138 NI Act. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 18-Apr-2026

    Disposed

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge

  4. 10-Apr-2026

    Judgement

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge

  5. 07-Apr-2026

    Final Arguments

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge

  6. 02-Apr-2026

    Final Arguments

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge

  7. 11-Mar-2026

    Final Arguments

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge

  8. 02-Mar-2026

    Defendants Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge

  9. 26-Feb-2026

    Evidence Of Complainant

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge

  10. 19-Jan-2026

    Evidence Of Complainant

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge

  11. 07-Jan-2026

    Evidence Of Complainant

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge

  12. 06-Jan-2026

    Evidence Of Complainant

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge

  13. 30-Dec-2025

    Evidence Of Complainant

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge

  14. 17-Dec-2025

    Evidence Of Complainant

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge

  15. 10-Nov-2025

    Evidence Of Complainant

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge

  16. 08-Oct-2025

    Evidence Of Complainant

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge

  17. 24-Sep-2025

    Evidence Of Complainant

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge

  18. 15-Sep-2025

    Evidence Of Complainant

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge

  19. 04-Sep-2025

    Evidence Of Complainant

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge

  20. 29-Aug-2025

    Evidence Of Complainant

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge

  21. 01-Aug-2025

    Evidence Of Complainant

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge

  22. 29-Jul-2025

    Evidence Of Complainant

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge

  23. 28-Jul-2025

    Process To Accused

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge

  24. 15-Jul-2025

    Process To Accused

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge

  25. 17-Jun-2025

    Process To Accused

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge

  26. 29-May-2025

    Process To Accused

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge

  27. 18-Apr-2025

    Process To Accused

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  28. 20-Feb-2025

    Process To Accused

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  29. 02-Jan-2025

    Process To Accused

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  30. 14-Nov-2024

    Process To Accused

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  31. 04-Oct-2024

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  32. 04-Oct-2024

    Case filed

    Registration No. 4792/2024

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The court acquitted the accused in a cheque dishonor case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, holding that the cheque was issued as security for a loan and the loan agreement was determined when the bank repossessed the mortgaged property, making the cheque an instrument without consideration. The court reasoned that once the financial institution exercised its option to repossess the vehicle/property, the underlying debt obligation ceased, and therefore demanding payment on the dishonored cheque violated principles of Section 138 NI Act. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case