MINABEN MANGALSINH RATHOD vs VISHAL RAJANIKANT PATEL Advocate - J B JOSHI — 3007/2024

Case under Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 02nd April 2026.

Case disposed

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJPM040045252024

Filing Number

3007/2024

Filing Date

18-Dec-2024

Registration No

3007/2024

Registration Date

18-Dec-2024

Court

TALUKA COURT, HALOL

Judge

4-Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

Decision Date

02-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL

Last updated 07-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.MINABEN MANGALSINH RATHOD

    Adv. M G RANA

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.VISHAL RAJANIKANT PATEL Advocate - J B JOSHI

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 02-Apr-2026

    Judegement

    Case Summary: 3007/2024 Court Decision: The court acquitted the respondent Vishal Rajanikant Patel of charges under the Negotiable Instruments Act, Section 138, finding that the petitioner failed to establish the essential elements of the offense. The court determined that while a check for Rs. 10,00,000 was issued as security for a loan, the petitioner's own bank statement and evidence demonstrated partial payments were made, and the relationship between the parties was settled through subsequent transactions, negating criminal liability. Key Reasoning: The court held that the petitioner had not proven the check was issued for a legally enforceable debt or that it was dishonored within the prescribed timeframe without valid justification. The evidence showed financial dealings between both parties across 2021-2022, with multiple deposits and withdrawals that indicated ongoing settlement rather than a clear default. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 02-Apr-2026

    Disposed

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  4. 13-Mar-2026

    Judgement

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  5. 05-Feb-2026

    Final Arguments

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  6. 09-Jan-2026

    Final Arguments

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  7. 11-Dec-2025

    Final Arguments

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  8. 14-Nov-2025

    Further Statement

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  9. 18-Oct-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  10. 19-Sep-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  11. 22-Aug-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  12. 02-Aug-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  13. 17-Jul-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  14. 26-Jun-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  15. 29-May-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  16. 24-Apr-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  17. 13-Mar-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  18. 30-Jan-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  19. 18-Dec-2024

    Case filed

    Registration No. 3007/2024

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: 3007/2024 Court Decision: The court acquitted the respondent Vishal Rajanikant Patel of charges under the Negotiable Instruments Act, Section 138, finding that the petitioner failed to establish the essential elements of the offense. The court determined that while a check for Rs. 10,00,000 was issued as security for a loan, the petitioner's own bank statement and evidence demonstrated partial payments were made, and the relationship between the parties was settled through subsequent transactions, negating criminal liability. Key Reasoning: The court held that the petitioner had not proven the check was issued for a legally enforceable debt or that it was dishonored within the prescribed timeframe without valid justification. The evidence showed financial dealings between both parties across 2021-2022, with multiple deposits and withdrawals that indicated ongoing settlement rather than a clear default. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case