SHRIRAM FINANCE LTD Br SANGLI vs Suraj Kashinath Chaugule — 2171/2025
Case under Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138. Status: First Order. Next hearing: 27th April 2026.
S.C.C. - Summons/Summary Criminal Case
CNR: MHSN030033742025
e-Filing Number
07-08-2025
Filing Number
3374/2025
Filing Date
08-Aug-2025
Registration No
2171/2025
Registration Date
11-Aug-2025
Court
Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sangli
Judge
2-Jt. Civil Judge Jr. Dn. J.M.F.C. Sangli
Last updated 05-Apr-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.SHRIRAM FINANCE LTD Br SANGLI
Adv. Patil Vishal Balgonda
Respondent(s)
-
1.Suraj Kashinath Chaugule
Case History
-
27-Apr-2026
Next hearingPending
-
07-Mar-2026
First Order
Jt. Civil Judge Jr. Dn. J.M.F.C. Sangli
-
20-Jan-2026
First Order
Jt. Civil Judge Jr. Dn. J.M.F.C. Sangli
-
02-Jan-2026
First Order
Jt. Civil Judge Jr. Dn. J.M.F.C. Sangli
-
05-Dec-2025
First Order
Jt. Civil Judge Jr. Dn. J.M.F.C. Sangli
-
31-Oct-2025
First Order
Jt. Civil Judge Jr. Dn. J.M.F.C. Sangli
-
24-Sep-2025
Order on ExhibitView PDF
Summary: The Judicial Magistrate First Class (Sangli) issued process against accused Suraj Kashinath Chougule for cheque bounce under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act. The court found a prima-facie case where the accused issued a cheque for Rs. 56,389 dated 19.06.2025 that was dishonored on 21.06.2025 due to insufficient funds, and the accused failed to pay despite receiving a demand notice on 11.07.2025. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
24-Sep-2025
First Order
Jt. Civil Judge Jr. Dn. J.M.F.C. Sangli
-
30-Aug-2025
First Order
Jt. Civil Judge Jr. Dn. J.M.F.C. Sangli
-
20-Aug-2025
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
08-Aug-2025
Case filed
Registration No. 2171/2025
Summary: The Judicial Magistrate First Class (Sangli) issued process against accused Suraj Kashinath Chougule for cheque bounce under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act. The court found a prima-facie case where the accused issued a cheque for Rs. 56,389 dated 19.06.2025 that was dishonored on 21.06.2025 due to insufficient funds, and the accused failed to pay despite receiving a demand notice on 11.07.2025. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts