MUHAMMAD HANEEFA vs SREEKANTH — 500459/2023

Case under Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138. Disposed: Contested--AQUITTED on 28th March 2026.

Case disposed

CC - CALENDAR CASE

CNR: KLAL190012092023

Filing Number

501183/2023

Filing Date

10-Nov-2023

Registration No

500459/2023

Registration Date

10-Nov-2023

Court

JFMC II, Mavelikkara

Judge

1-Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Mavelikara

Decision Date

28-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--AQUITTED

Last updated 25-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.MUHAMMAD HANEEFA

    Adv. MUJEEB REHMAN. A

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.SREEKANTH

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 28-Mar-2026

    JudgementView PDF

    Summary: The court acquitted the accused Sreekanth of charges under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, finding him not guilty. While the court established that the cheque was executed by the accused and statutory presumptions favored the complainant, it found the accused's defense—that he had issued a blank signed cheque to Mr. Suresh (not the complainant) which was later misused—to be probable. The complainant's failure to adequately plead and prove the original transaction with the accused, combined with evidence showing differences in handwriting and the complainant's admission of not knowing who filled in the cheque details, was sufficient to rebut the statutory presumptions, warranting acquittal under Section 255(1) CrPC. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 28-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Mavelikara

  4. 17-Mar-2026

    Order/ Judgement

    Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Mavelikara

  5. 12-Mar-2026

    Order/ Judgement

    Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Mavelikara

  6. 05-Mar-2026

    For further hearing

    Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Mavelikara

  7. 28-Feb-2026

    Order/Judgement

    Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Mavelikara

  8. 27-Feb-2026

    Order/Judgement

    Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Mavelikara

  9. 10-Feb-2026

    No sitting notified

    Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Mavelikara

  10. 05-Feb-2026

    Order/Judgement

    Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Mavelikara

  11. 29-Jan-2026

    For Hearing

    Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Mavelikara

  12. 28-Jan-2026

    For Hearing

    Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Mavelikara

  13. 24-Jan-2026

    For Hearing

    Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Mavelikara

  14. 22-Jan-2026

    For Hearing

    Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Mavelikara

  15. 15-Jan-2026

    For Hearing

    Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Mavelikara

  16. 13-Jan-2026

    Defence Evidence

    Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Mavelikara

  17. 08-Jan-2026

    Examination of the Accused U/S 313 Cr.PC

    Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Mavelikara

  18. 27-Dec-2025

    for evidence.

    Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Mavelikara

  19. 22-Nov-2025

    Further evidence

    Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Mavelikara

  20. 17-Oct-2025

    To summon witness

    Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Mavelikara

  21. 18-Sep-2025

    To summon witness

    Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Mavelikara

  22. 23-Aug-2025

    No sitting notified

    Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Mavelikara

  23. 31-Jul-2025

    Report on mediation

    Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Mavelikara

  24. 03-Jul-2025

    Report on mediation

    Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Mavelikara

  25. 12-Jun-2025

    Referred to Mediator

    Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Mavelikara

  26. 17-May-2025

    To summon witness

    Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Mavelikara

  27. 15-May-2025

    Further evidence

    Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Mavelikara

  28. 10-Apr-2025

    Further evidence

    Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Mavelikara

  29. 05-Apr-2025

    No Further Time

    Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Mavelikara

  30. 27-Mar-2025

    Appearance Of Parties

    Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Mavelikara

  31. 13-Mar-2025

    Appearance Of Parties

    Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Mavelikara

  32. 22-Feb-2025

    Appearance of Accused

    Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Mavelikara

  33. 13-Feb-2025

    For cross examination.

    Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Mavelikara

  34. 27-Jan-2025

    for evidence.

    Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Mavelikara

  35. 21-Jan-2025

    for evidence.

    Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Mavelikara

  36. 16-Dec-2024

    82-83 Steps

    Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Mavelikara

  37. 06-Nov-2024

    Return of warrant

    Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Mavelikara

  38. 27-Sep-2024

    Return of warrant

    Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Mavelikara

  39. 12-Aug-2024

    Return of warrant

    Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Mavelikara

  40. 10-Jun-2024

    Return of warrant

    Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Mavelikara

  41. 30-Apr-2024

    For Steps

    Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Mavelikara

  42. 01-Mar-2024

    Return of warrant

    Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Mavelikara

  43. 01-Feb-2024

    Appearance of Petitioner

    Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Mavelikara

  44. 09-Jan-2024

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  45. 10-Nov-2023

    Case filed

    Registration No. 500459/2023

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The court acquitted the accused Sreekanth of charges under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, finding him not guilty. While the court established that the cheque was executed by the accused and statutory presumptions favored the complainant, it found the accused's defense—that he had issued a blank signed cheque to Mr. Suresh (not the complainant) which was later misused—to be probable. The complainant's failure to adequately plead and prove the original transaction with the accused, combined with evidence showing differences in handwriting and the complainant's admission of not knowing who filled in the cheque details, was sufficient to rebut the statutory presumptions, warranting acquittal under Section 255(1) CrPC. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case