labh cand jain vs rajesh mali kekri — 180/2018

Case under Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138. Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 13th March 2026.

Case disposed

Cr. Reg. Case - CR. REGULAR

CNR: RJAJ140002682018

Filing Number

268/2018

Filing Date

16-Feb-2018

Registration No

180/2018

Registration Date

08-Feb-2018

Court

ACJM JM Kekri Taluka Criminal

Judge

2-Acjm 1

Decision Date

13-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Acquitted

Last updated 06-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.labh cand jain

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.rajesh mali kekri

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 13-Mar-2026

    JudgementView PDF

    Case Summary: Labh Cand Jain v. Rajesh Kumar Mali Court Decision: The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kekri (Ajmer) acquitted the accused Rajesh Kumar under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. Key Reasoning: The court found that the complainant failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that a legally enforceable debt existed. Critical evidentiary gaps included: (1) the legal notice was sent to the wrong address ("Khati Mohalla" instead of the accused's actual residence "Khaigarh Mohalla"), undermining service of notice; (2) the complainant's own testimony contained contradictory statements about when and how the Rs. 2,00,000 loan was disbursed; (3) no documentary evidence supported the alleged loan; and (4) the commercial relationship between the accused and complainant's brother suggested the cheque may have been for a business transaction rather than a personal loan, contradicting the complainant's narrative. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 13-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Acjm 1

  4. 26-Feb-2026

    Final arguments

    Acjm 1

  5. 07-Feb-2026

    Final arguments

    Acjm 1

  6. 15-Jan-2026

    Final arguments

    Acjm 1

  7. 17-Dec-2025

    Final arguments

    Acjm 1

  8. 06-Nov-2025

    Final arguments

    Acjm 1

  9. 29-Oct-2025

    Final arguments

    Acjm 1

  10. 08-Oct-2025

    Final arguments

    Acjm 1

  11. 06-Oct-2025

    OrderView PDF

  12. 06-Oct-2025

    Final arguments

    Acjm 1

  13. 04-Sep-2025

    Final arguments

    Acjm 1

  14. 14-Aug-2025

    Final arguments

    Acjm 1

  15. 21-Jul-2025

    Final arguments

    Acjm 1

  16. 30-Jun-2025

    Final arguments

    Acjm 1

  17. 22-May-2025

    Final arguments

    Acjm 1

  18. 14-May-2025

    Final arguments

    Acjm 1

  19. 22-Apr-2025

    Final arguments

    Acjm 1

  20. 07-Apr-2025

    Final arguments

    Acjm 1

  21. 26-Mar-2025

    Final arguments

    Acjm 1

  22. 15-Feb-2025

    Defence Evidence

    Acjm 1

  23. 09-Jan-2025

    Defence Evidence

    Acjm 1

  24. 04-Dec-2024

    Defence Evidence

    Acjm 1

  25. 15-Oct-2024

    Defence Evidence

    Acjm 1

  26. 21-Sep-2024

    Examination of accused u/s. 313 Cr.P.C.

    Acjm 1

  27. 28-Aug-2024

    Examination of accused u/s. 313 Cr.P.C.

    Acjm 1

  28. 19-Jul-2024

    Examination of accused u/s. 313 Cr.P.C.

    Acjm 1

  29. 29-Jun-2024

    Examination of accused u/s. 313 Cr.P.C.

    Acjm 1

  30. 21-May-2024

    Examination of accused u/s. 313 Cr.P.C.

    Acjm 1

  31. 30-Apr-2024

    Examination of accused u/s. 313 Cr.P.C.

    Acjm 1

  32. 18-Apr-2024

    Evidence before Charge

    Acjm 1

  33. 18-Mar-2024

    Evidence before Charge

    Acjm 1

  34. 15-Jan-2024

    Evidence before Charge

    Acjm 1

  35. 08-Nov-2023

    Evidence before Charge

    Acjm 1

  36. 19-Oct-2023

    Service of Summons/bailable warrant

    Acjm 1

  37. 22-Aug-2023

    Service of Summons/bailable warrant

    Acjm 1

  38. 15-Jun-2023

    Service of Summons/bailable warrant

    Acjm 1

  39. 02-Jun-2023

    Service of Summons/bailable warrant

    Acjm 1

  40. 06-Apr-2023

    Service of Summons/bailable warrant

    Acjm 1

  41. 08-Feb-2023

    Service of Summons/bailable warrant

    Acjm 1

  42. 31-Jan-2023

    Service of Summons/bailable warrant

    Acjm 1

  43. 20-Dec-2022

    Service of Summons/bailable warrant

    Acjm 1

  44. 29-Oct-2022

    Service of Summons/bailable warrant

    Acjm 1

  45. 12-Sep-2022

    Service of Summons/bailable warrant

    Acjm 1

  46. 22-Jun-2022

    Service of Summons/bailable warrant

    Acjm 1

  47. 04-Apr-2022

    Service of Summons/bailable warrant

    Acjm 1

  48. 05-Jan-2022

    Service of Summons/bailable warrant

    Acjm 1

  49. 27-Oct-2021

    Service of Summons/bailable warrant

    Acjm 1

  50. 26-Oct-2021

    Service of Summons/bailable warrant

    Acjm 1

  51. 26-Jul-2021

    Service of Summons/bailable warrant

    Acjm 1

  52. 18-May-2021

    Service of Summons/bailable warrant

    Acjm 1

  53. 24-Feb-2021

    Service of Summons/bailable warrant

    Acjm 1

  54. 10-Nov-2020

    Service of Summons/bailable warrant

    Acjm 1

  55. 13-Oct-2020

    Service of Summons/bailable warrant

    Acjm 1

  56. 10-Sep-2020

    Service of Summons/bailable warrant

    Acjm 1

  57. 06-Jul-2020

    Service of Summons/bailable warrant

    Acjm 1

  58. 20-Apr-2020

    Service of Summons/bailable warrant

    Acjm 1

  59. 15-Feb-2020

    Service of Summons/bailable warrant

    Acjm 1

  60. 18-Dec-2019

    Service of Summons/bailable warrant

    Acjm 1

  61. 18-Oct-2019

    Service of Summons/bailable warrant

    Acjm 1

  62. 13-Aug-2019

    Service of Summons/bailable warrant

    Acjm 1

  63. 18-May-2019

    Service of Summons/bailable warrant

  64. 08-Mar-2019

    Service of Summons/bailable warrant

    Acjm 1

  65. 27-Nov-2018

    Service of Summons/bailable warrant

    Acjm 1

  66. 20-Sep-2018

    Service of Summons/bailable warrant

    Acjm 1

  67. 19-Jul-2018

    Service of Summons/bailable warrant

    Acjm 1

  68. 19-May-2018

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  69. 16-Feb-2018

    Case filed

    Registration No. 180/2018

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: Labh Cand Jain v. Rajesh Kumar Mali Court Decision: The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kekri (Ajmer) acquitted the accused Rajesh Kumar under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. Key Reasoning: The court found that the complainant failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that a legally enforceable debt existed. Critical evidentiary gaps included: (1) the legal notice was sent to the wrong address ("Khati Mohalla" instead of the accused's actual residence "Khaigarh Mohalla"), undermining service of notice; (2) the complainant's own testimony contained contradictory statements about when and how the Rs. 2,00,000 loan was disbursed; (3) no documentary evidence supported the alleged loan; and (4) the commercial relationship between the accused and complainant's brother suggested the cheque may have been for a business transaction rather than a personal loan, contradicting the complainant's narrative. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case