sankar lal vs Ratan lal gadri — 1130/2021
Case under Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138. Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 25th March 2026.
Cr. Reg. Case - CR. REGULAR
CNR: RJRS070005932021
Filing Number
593/2021
Filing Date
03-Mar-2021
Registration No
1130/2021
Registration Date
04-Dec-2021
Court
ACJM JM Nathdwara Taluka
Judge
5-Spl. Jm (N.i. Act Cases)
Decision Date
25-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Acquitted
Last updated 15-May-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.sankar lal
Adv. Shayam Sundar Mali
Respondent(s)
-
1.Ratan lal gadri
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
25-Mar-2026
JudgementView PDF
Court Decision Summary The Special Judicial Magistrate (NIA Act), Nathdhwara, convicted the accused Ratnlal under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for issuing a dishonored check. The court rejected the accused's defense that the loan had become time-barred (beyond the 3-year limitation period), finding that the debt was legally enforceable when the check was issued and that the accused failed to rebut the statutory presumption under Sections 118(a) and 139 of the Act. The accused was sentenced accordingly. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
25-Mar-2026
Disposed
Spl. Jm (N.i. Act Cases)
-
25-Feb-2026
Final arguments
Spl. Jm (N.i. Act Cases)
-
11-Feb-2026
Final arguments
Spl. Jm (N.i. Act Cases)
-
28-Jan-2026
Final arguments
Spl. Jm (N.i. Act Cases)
-
21-Jan-2026
Final arguments
Spl. Jm (N.i. Act Cases)
-
07-Jan-2026
Final arguments
Spl. Jm (N.i. Act Cases)
-
03-Dec-2025
Final arguments
Spl. Jm (N.i. Act Cases)
-
12-Nov-2025
Final arguments
Spl. Jm (N.i. Act Cases)
-
29-Oct-2025
Final arguments
Spl. Jm (N.i. Act Cases)
-
08-Oct-2025
Final arguments
Spl. Jm (N.i. Act Cases)
-
17-Sep-2025
Defence Evidence
Spl. Jm (N.i. Act Cases)
-
10-Sep-2025
Defence Evidence
Spl. Jm (N.i. Act Cases)
-
20-Aug-2025
Defence Evidence
Spl. Jm (N.i. Act Cases)
-
13-Aug-2025
Reply of Application/ Steps by parties
Spl. Jm (N.i. Act Cases)
-
30-Jul-2025
Reply of Application/ Steps by parties
Spl. Jm (N.i. Act Cases)
-
09-Jul-2025
Reply of Application/ Steps by parties
Spl. Jm (N.i. Act Cases)
-
04-Jun-2025
Defence Evidence
Spl. Jm (N.i. Act Cases)
-
28-May-2025
Defence Evidence
Spl. Jm (N.i. Act Cases)
-
14-May-2025
Defence Evidence
Spl. Jm (N.i. Act Cases)
-
30-Apr-2025
Defence Evidence
Spl. Jm (N.i. Act Cases)
-
23-Apr-2025
Examination of accused u/s. 313 Cr.P.C.
Spl. Jm (N.i. Act Cases)
-
02-Apr-2025
Examination of accused u/s. 313 Cr.P.C.
Spl. Jm (N.i. Act Cases)
-
10-Mar-2025
Prosecution Evidence
Spl. Jm (N.i. Act Cases)
-
01-Mar-2025
Prosecution Evidence
Spl. Jm (N.i. Act Cases)
-
04-Jan-2025
Prosecution Evidence
Spl. Jm (N.i. Act Cases)
-
16-Nov-2024
Prosecution Evidence
Spl. Jm (N.i. Act Cases)
-
25-Sep-2024
Prosecution Evidence
Spl. Jm (N.i. Act Cases)
-
10-Jul-2024
Prosecution Evidence
Spl. Jm (N.i. Act Cases)
-
19-Jun-2024
Prosecution Evidence
Spl. Jm (N.i. Act Cases)
-
29-May-2024
Prosecution Evidence
Spl. Jm (N.i. Act Cases)
-
27-Mar-2024
Appearance of accused
Spl. Jm (N.i. Act Cases)
-
10-Jan-2024
Appearance of accused
Spl. Jm (N.i. Act Cases)
-
11-Oct-2023
Appearance of accused
Jm No. 1
-
21-Jun-2023
Appearance of accused
Jm No. 1
-
05-Apr-2023
Appearance of accused
Jm No. 1
-
11-Jan-2023
Appearance of accused
Jm No. 1
-
16-Nov-2022
Appearance of accused
Jm No. 1
-
14-Sep-2022
Appearance of accused
Jm No. 1
-
18-Jun-2022
Appearance of accused
Jm No. 1
-
04-Dec-2021
Appearance of accused
Acjm
-
11-Sep-2021
Cognizance / issuance of Process/ Service
Acjm
-
22-Jul-2021
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
03-Mar-2021
Case filed
Registration No. 1130/2021
Court Decision Summary The Special Judicial Magistrate (NIA Act), Nathdhwara, convicted the accused Ratnlal under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for issuing a dishonored check. The court rejected the accused's defense that the loan had become time-barred (beyond the 3-year limitation period), finding that the debt was legally enforceable when the check was issued and that the accused failed to rebut the statutory presumption under Sections 118(a) and 139 of the Act. The accused was sentenced accordingly. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts