Jagadeeswari G vs Sundar V — 114/2023

Case under Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138. Disposed: Contested--Conviction on 24th April 2026.

CC - Calendar Case

CNR: TNCG060035072023

Case disposed

Filing Number

3493/2023

Filing Date

06-04-2023

Registration No

114/2023

Registration Date

16-05-2023

Court

Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Chengalpet

Judge

8-Judicial Magistrate-I, Chengalpattu

Decision Date

24th April 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Conviction

Acts & Sections

NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT, 1881 Section 138

Petitioner(s)

Jagadeeswari G

Adv. Magesh Kumar.H.T

Respondent(s)

Sundar V

Hearing History

Judge: 8-Judicial Magistrate-I, Chengalpattu

24-04-2026

Disposed

21-04-2026

Judgement

16-04-2026

Compliance

07-04-2026

Compliance

30-03-2026

Compliance

Final Orders / Judgements

24-04-2026
Copy of Judgment

Case Summary: 114/2023 (Jagadeeswari G v. Sundar V) The court convicted the accused under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for dishonoring a cheque worth ₹3,00,000. The complainant had lent ₹8,00,000 to the accused, who issued the cheque on 21.02.2023, but it was returned due to insufficient funds. After the complainant served statutory notice, the accused failed to pay, leading to this prosecution. The accused's defense that the cheque was stolen in 2017 by the complainant's husband was rejected as insufficiently proven, lacking corroborating evidence or witness testimony. The court sentenced the accused to four months simple imprisonment and ordered payment of the cheque amount as compensation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Interim Orders

17-11-2023
Oral Evidence
29-11-2024
Oral Evidence
17-04-2025
Oral Evidence
29-08-2025
Oral Evidence
12-01-2026
Oral Evidence
casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: 114/2023 (Jagadeeswari G v. Sundar V) The court convicted the accused under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for dishonoring a cheque worth ₹3,00,000. The complainant had lent ₹8,00,000 to the accused, who issued the cheque on 21.02.2023, but it was returned due to insufficient funds. After the complainant served statutory notice, the accused failed to pay, leading to this prosecution. The accused's defense that the cheque was stolen in 2017 by the complainant's husband was rejected as insufficiently proven, lacking corroborating evidence or witness testimony. The court sentenced the accused to four months simple imprisonment and ordered payment of the cheque amount as compensation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Chengalpet All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case