Sanjay Gandhi vs Ramesh Advocate - KATHIRAVAN. P. — 34/2023

Case under Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138,142,. Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 27th March 2026.

STC - Small Cause Calendar case / Summary Trial Case

CNR: TNSA110000322023

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

32/2023

Filing Date

03-06-2023

Registration No

34/2023

Registration Date

09-06-2023

Court

Fast Track Court at Magisterial Level, Omalur

Judge

3-Judicial Magistrate, Fast Track Court at Magestrial level, Omalur

Decision Date

27th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Acquitted

Acts & Sections

NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT, 1881 Section 138,142,
MP/1/2025 Classification : 317 Cr.PC Section Sanjay Gandhi

Petitioner(s)

Sanjay Gandhi

Adv. Mahenthyran.T.S

Respondent(s)

Ramesh Advocate - KATHIRAVAN. P.

Hearing History

Judge: 3-Judicial Magistrate, Fast Track Court at Magestrial level, Omalur

27-03-2026

Disposed

10-03-2026

Judgement

05-03-2026

Arguments

26-02-2026

Arguments

18-02-2026

Arguments

Final Orders / Judgements

27-03-2026
Copy of Judgment

Summary The Judicial Magistrate acquitted the accused Ramesh of cheque dishonor charges under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, finding that while the complainant established initial statutory presumptions, the accused successfully rebutted them through cross-examination evidence and documents showing the cheque was connected to the accused's son's employment at Sangamam Cooperative Society, not a personal loan. The court held that the complainant failed to prove the existence of legally enforceable debt beyond reasonable doubt, particularly due to discrepancies in the loan date and lack of independent witness corroboration. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Interim Orders

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The Judicial Magistrate acquitted the accused Ramesh of cheque dishonor charges under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, finding that while the complainant established initial statutory presumptions, the accused successfully rebutted them through cross-examination evidence and documents showing the cheque was connected to the accused's son's employment at Sangamam Cooperative Society, not a personal loan. The court held that the complainant failed to prove the existence of legally enforceable debt beyond reasonable doubt, particularly due to discrepancies in the loan date and lack of independent witness corroboration. 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

Fast Track Court at Magisterial Level, Omalur All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case