JOMON AUGUSTINE, vs JOBIN T JOSE — 304821/2017
Case under Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138. Disposed: Contested--CONVICTED AND FINED on 18th March 2026.
ST - SUMMARY TRIAL
CNR: KLKT120064232017
Filing Number
304821/2017
Filing Date
01-07-2017
Registration No
304821/2017
Registration Date
01-07-2017
Court
Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-1, Pala
Judge
1-JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE-1 PALA
Decision Date
18th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--CONVICTED AND FINED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
JOMON AUGUSTINE,
Respondent(s)
JOBIN T JOSE
Hearing History
Judge: 1-JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE-1 PALA
Disposed
Order/Judgement
Order/Judgement
Order/Judgement
For Further Hearing
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 18-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 16-03-2026 | Order/Judgement |
| 11-03-2026 | Order/Judgement |
| 06-03-2026 | Order/Judgement |
| 03-03-2026 | For Further Hearing |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: Jomon Augustine v. Jobin T Jose (Case 304821/2017) The Judicial Magistrate convicted Jobin T Jose of three offences under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for issuing three cheques (₹1,15,000, ₹50,000, and ₹1,50,000) that were dishonoured due to insufficient funds. The court found that the accused had signed the cheques as repayment for a vehicle purchase dispute, received a lawyer's notice, failed to respond, and provided no evidence of sufficient account balance. The court sentenced the accused to 6 months simple imprisonment with fines totalling ₹3,15,000 (concurrent sentences) and ordered fines paid to the complainant as compensation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: Jomon Augustine v. Jobin T Jose (Case 304821/2017) The Judicial Magistrate convicted Jobin T Jose of three offences under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for issuing three cheques (₹1,15,000, ₹50,000, and ₹1,50,000) that were dishonoured due to insufficient funds. The court found that the accused had signed the cheques as repayment for a vehicle purchase dispute, received a lawyer's notice, failed to respond, and provided no evidence of sufficient account balance. The court sentenced the accused to 6 months simple imprisonment with fines totalling ₹3,15,000 (concurrent sentences) and ordered fines paid to the complainant as compensation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts