Matoshri Souharda Credit Sahakari Niyamita Kumta R/by Naveenkumar R Naik vs Manish Ashok Harikanth — 98/2023
Case under Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138,141,142. Disposed: Contested--CONVICTED AND SENTENCED on 12th May 2026.
C.C. - CRIMINAL CASES
CNR: KAUK720003622023
Filing Number
98/2023
Filing Date
19-07-2023
Registration No
98/2023
Registration Date
19-07-2023
Court
PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, KUMTA
Judge
904-SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC COURT, KUMTA
Decision Date
12th May 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--CONVICTED AND SENTENCED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Matoshri Souharda Credit Sahakari Niyamita Kumta R/by Naveenkumar R Naik
Adv. Parameshwar Ganesh Hegde
Respondent(s)
Manish Ashok Harikanth
Hearing History
Judge: 904-SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC COURT, KUMTA
Disposed
JUDGEMENT
ARGUMENTS
DEFENCE EVIDENCE
CROSS OF P W 1
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 12-05-2026 | Disposed |
| 05-05-2026 | JUDGEMENT |
| 28-04-2026 | ARGUMENTS |
| 24-04-2026 | DEFENCE EVIDENCE |
| 17-04-2026 | CROSS OF P W 1 |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: CC No. 98/2023 The court convicted Manish Ashok Harikanth under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for issuing a cheque (No. 132111) for Rs. 46,996 that bounced due to insufficient funds. The accused had borrowed Rs. 35,000 from Matoshri Souharda Credit Cooperative Society and issued the cheque toward repayment, but failed to honor it or respond to the legal notice. The court sentenced him to pay a fine of Rs. 45,996 (with Rs. 40,996 as compensation to the complainant) or face one year's simple imprisonment in default. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
Case Summary: CC No. 98/2023 The court convicted Manish Ashok Harikanth under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for issuing a cheque (No. 132111) for Rs. 46,996 that bounced due to insufficient funds. The accused had borrowed Rs. 35,000 from Matoshri Souharda Credit Cooperative Society and issued the cheque toward repayment, but failed to honor it or respond to the legal notice. The court sentenced him to pay a fine of Rs. 45,996 (with Rs. 40,996 as compensation to the complainant) or face one year's simple imprisonment in default. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts