Dilip vs Jitendra Advocate - HARISH MEGHWAL — 143/2019

Case under Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138. Disposed: Contested--Convicted and Sentenced on 10th March 2026.

Case disposed

Complaint

CNR: RJPG090003292019

Filing Number

329/2019

Filing Date

14-Mar-2019

Registration No

143/2019

Registration Date

14-Mar-2019

Court

ACJM TALUKACOURT DHARIYAWAD

Judge

10-Acjm

Decision Date

10-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Convicted and Sentenced

Last updated 16-Apr-2026

Acts & Sections

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Dilip

    Adv. HARISINGH KOTHARI

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Jitendra Advocate - HARISH MEGHWAL

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 10-Mar-2026

    JudgementView PDF

    Court Decision Summary The Chief Judicial Magistrate of Dhariawad, Pratapgarh, Rajasthan convicted the accused Jitendra Gargu under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 for dishonoring a check of ₹2,80,000 issued to repay a loan. The court found that the accused issued the check dated 09.10.2018, which was dishonored due to insufficient funds, and despite receiving a legal notice within the statutory period, failed to pay the amount. The court sentenced him to one year imprisonment and imposed a fine of ₹3,80,000, with an additional 15 days imprisonment in case of non-payment. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 10-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Acjm

  4. 09-Mar-2026

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

    Acjm

  5. 26-Feb-2026

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

    Acjm

  6. 18-Feb-2026

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

    Acjm

  7. 10-Feb-2026

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

    Acjm

  8. 28-Jan-2026

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

    Acjm

  9. 21-Jan-2026

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

    Acjm

  10. 13-Jan-2026

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

    Acjm

  11. 06-Jan-2026

    Prosecution Evidence

    Acjm

  12. 23-Dec-2025

    Prosecution Evidence

    Acjm

  13. 16-Dec-2025

    Prosecution Evidence

    Acjm

  14. 02-Dec-2025

    Prosecution Evidence

    Acjm

  15. 18-Nov-2025

    Orders

    Acjm

  16. 27-Oct-2025

    Orders

    Acjm

  17. 08-Oct-2025

    Orders

    Acjm

  18. 27-Aug-2025

    Orders

    Acjm

  19. 18-Aug-2025

    Orders

    Acjm

  20. 18-Aug-2025

    Restored

    Acjm

  21. 22-Nov-2022

    OrderView PDF

  22. 22-Nov-2022

    Disposed

    Acjm

  23. 12-Oct-2022

    Appearance of accused

    Acjm

  24. 14-Sep-2022

    Appearance of accused

    Acjm

  25. 30-Jul-2022

    Appearance of accused

    Acjm

  26. 23-May-2022

    Appearance of accused

    Acjm

  27. 25-Mar-2022

    Appearance of accused

    Acjm

  28. 12-Mar-2022

    Appearance of accused

    Acjm

  29. 07-Feb-2022

    Appearance of accused

    Acjm

  30. 07-Jan-2022

    Appearance of accused

    Acjm

  31. 24-Nov-2021

    Appearance of accused

    Acjm

  32. 23-Oct-2021

    Appearance of accused

    Acjm

  33. 27-Sep-2021

    Appearance of accused

    Acjm

  34. 27-Aug-2021

    Appearance of accused

    Acjm

  35. 29-Jul-2021

    Appearance of accused

    Acjm

  36. 29-May-2021

    Appearance of accused

    Acjm

  37. 06-Mar-2021

    Appearance of accused

    Acjm

  38. 05-Dec-2020

    Appearance of accused

    Acjm

  39. 04-Sep-2020

    Appearance of accused

    Acjm

  40. 17-Jun-2020

    Appearance of accused

    Acjm

  41. 23-Apr-2020

    Appearance of accused

    Acjm

  42. 20-Feb-2020

    Appearance of accused

    Acjm

  43. 13-Jan-2020

    Appearance of accused

    Acjm

  44. 11-Jan-2020

    Appearance of accused

    Acjm

  45. 08-Nov-2019

    Appearance of accused

    Acjm

  46. 27-Sep-2019

    Appearance of accused

    Acjm

  47. 21-Aug-2019

    Appearance of accused

    Acjm

  48. 29-Jun-2019

    Appearance of accused

    Acjm

  49. 03-May-2019

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  50. 14-Mar-2019

    Case filed

    Registration No. 143/2019

casestatus.in Summary

Court Decision Summary The Chief Judicial Magistrate of Dhariawad, Pratapgarh, Rajasthan convicted the accused Jitendra Gargu under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 for dishonoring a check of ₹2,80,000 issued to repay a loan. The court found that the accused issued the check dated 09.10.2018, which was dishonored due to insufficient funds, and despite receiving a legal notice within the statutory period, failed to pay the amount. The court sentenced him to one year imprisonment and imposed a fine of ₹3,80,000, with an additional 15 days imprisonment in case of non-payment. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case