Kareem vs NAUSHAD Advocate - PRATAPAN C S — 103258/2016
Case under Negotiable Instruments Act \ Section 138. Disposed: Contested--AQUITTED on 28th April 2026.
CC - CALENDAR CASE
CNR: KLTR250059052016
Filing Number
103258/2016
Filing Date
31-12-2016
Registration No
103258/2016
Registration Date
31-12-2016
Court
JFCM Court, Kunnamkulam
Judge
1-Judicial First Class Magistrate
Decision Date
28th April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--AQUITTED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Kareem
Adv. P P Harris
Respondent(s)
NAUSHAD Advocate - PRATAPAN C S
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Judicial First Class Magistrate
Disposed
Order/ Judgement
Order/ Judgement
Order/ Judgement
call on
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 28-04-2026 | Disposed |
| 27-04-2026 | Order/ Judgement |
| 20-04-2026 | Order/ Judgement |
| 08-04-2026 | Order/ Judgement |
| 06-04-2026 | call on |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: CC 3258/2016 and CC 3259/2016 Decision: Accused Noushad was acquitted of charges under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for two dishonored cheques totaling ₹1,48,50,697. Key Reasoning: The court found the complainant's testimony unreliable due to fatal contradictions regarding when and where the cheques were delivered. The complainant gave three conflicting accounts: cheques issued in Qatar in April 2015, cheques delivered at his house in India after arrival, and cheques issued a year later. Since the complainant failed to prove the date and place of cheque delivery, the statutory presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act was rebutted, warranting acquittal. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: CC 3258/2016 and CC 3259/2016 Decision: Accused Noushad was acquitted of charges under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for two dishonored cheques totaling ₹1,48,50,697. Key Reasoning: The court found the complainant's testimony unreliable due to fatal contradictions regarding when and where the cheques were delivered. The complainant gave three conflicting accounts: cheques issued in Qatar in April 2015, cheques delivered at his house in India after arrival, and cheques issued a year later. Since the complainant failed to prove the date and place of cheque delivery, the statutory presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act was rebutted, warranting acquittal. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts