Sardhar vs Jeyaprakash — 2853/2025

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 430. Disposed: Contested--Dismissed on 12th March 2026.

Case disposed

CRLMP - Criminal Miscellaneous Petition

CNR: TNDG010060482025

Filing Number

3749/2025

Filing Date

17-Dec-2025

Registration No

2853/2025

Registration Date

17-Dec-2025

Court

Principal District Court, Dindugul

Judge

1-Principal District Judge

Decision Date

12-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Dismissed

Last updated 23-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 430

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Sardhar

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Jeyaprakash

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 12-Mar-2026

    Copy of OrderView PDF

    The Principal Sessions Judge, Dindigul dismissed Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No. 2853/2025 because the petitioner/accused failed to comply with the court's conditional order to deposit 10% of the cheque amount by the extended deadline of 10.3.2026, despite being granted sufficient opportunities. The court found no arguable points in the appeal and noted that the petitioner's counsel reported no instructions, warranting dismissal of the petition. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 12-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Principal District Judge

  4. 10-Mar-2026

    Admission

    Principal District Judge

  5. 20-Feb-2026

    Admission

    Principal District Judge

  6. 29-Jan-2026

    Copy of OrderView PDF

  7. 29-Jan-2026

    Admission

    Principal District Judge

  8. 19-Jan-2026

    Admission

    Principal District Judge

  9. 05-Jan-2026

    Admission

    Principal District Judge

  10. 17-Dec-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  11. 17-Dec-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. 2853/2025

casestatus.in Summary

The Principal Sessions Judge, Dindigul dismissed Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No. 2853/2025 because the petitioner/accused failed to comply with the court's conditional order to deposit 10% of the cheque amount by the extended deadline of 10.3.2026, despite being granted sufficient opportunities. The court found no arguable points in the appeal and noted that the petitioner's counsel reported no instructions, warranting dismissal of the petition. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case