MOHAMAD ALTAF ABDUL MANJARA vs SOHELBHAI YUSUFBHAI KHER Advocate - P M SAWANT — 247/2025

Case under Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138,142. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 18th April 2026.

Case disposed

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJSR050003312025

Filing Number

247/2025

Filing Date

11-Feb-2025

Registration No

247/2025

Registration Date

11-Feb-2025

Court

TALUKA COURT, MANGROL

Judge

3-Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

Decision Date

18-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL

Last updated 31-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138,142

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.MOHAMAD ALTAF ABDUL MANJARA

    Adv. S S NOORMOHMED

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.SOHELBHAI YUSUFBHAI KHER Advocate - P M SAWANT

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 18-Apr-2026

    Judegement

    Case Summary: C.C.NO. 247/2025 Court Decision: The Chief Judicial Magistrate acquitted defendant Sohelbhai Yusufbhai Kher of charges under the Negotiable Instruments Act sections 138 and 142. The court found the complainant failed to prove essential elements of the offense—specifically that the check amount of ₹1,85,000 was issued for a legally enforceable debt beyond dispute, as the actual sugarcane sale agreement showed only ₹1,55,000. The complainant's failure to establish the statutory presumption in his favor resulted in acquittal. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 18-Apr-2026

    Disposed

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  4. 16-Apr-2026

    Final Arguments

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  5. 03-Apr-2026

    Final Arguments

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  6. 13-Mar-2026

    Final Arguments

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  7. 12-Mar-2026

    Final Arguments

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  8. 03-Mar-2026

    Final Arguments

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  9. 18-Feb-2026

    Final Arguments

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  10. 06-Feb-2026

    Final Arguments

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  11. 16-Jan-2026

    Final Arguments

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  12. 19-Dec-2025

    Final Arguments

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  13. 05-Dec-2025

    Final Arguments

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  14. 20-Nov-2025

    Final Arguments

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  15. 04-Nov-2025

    Final Arguments

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  16. 06-Oct-2025

    Final Arguments

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  17. 16-Sep-2025

    Final Arguments

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  18. 03-Sep-2025

    Final Arguments

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  19. 19-Aug-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  20. 06-Aug-2025

    Final Arguments

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  21. 25-Jul-2025

    Final Arguments

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  22. 15-Jul-2025

    Final Arguments

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  23. 02-Jul-2025

    Evidence Of Defence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  24. 20-Jun-2025

    Evidence Of Defence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  25. 11-Jun-2025

    Evidence Of Defence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  26. 26-May-2025

    Further Statement

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  27. 13-May-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  28. 29-Apr-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  29. 09-Apr-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  30. 13-Mar-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  31. 11-Feb-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. 247/2025

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: C.C.NO. 247/2025 Court Decision: The Chief Judicial Magistrate acquitted defendant Sohelbhai Yusufbhai Kher of charges under the Negotiable Instruments Act sections 138 and 142. The court found the complainant failed to prove essential elements of the offense—specifically that the check amount of ₹1,85,000 was issued for a legally enforceable debt beyond dispute, as the actual sugarcane sale agreement showed only ₹1,55,000. The complainant's failure to establish the statutory presumption in his favor resulted in acquittal. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case