Abilash vs Natarajan — 287/2025
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 348. Disposed: Contested--Allowed on 27th April 2026.
CRLMP - Criminal Miscellaneous Petition
CNR: TNSV120005782025
Filing Number
576/2025
Filing Date
27-Nov-2025
Registration No
287/2025
Registration Date
27-Nov-2025
Court
Fast Track Court at Magisterial Level, Karaikudi
Judge
3-Judicial Magistrate (Ftc ML), Karaikudi
Decision Date
27-Apr-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Allowed
Last updated 09-May-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Abilash
Respondent(s)
-
1.Natarajan
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
27-Apr-2026
IA orderView PDF
Summary The Fast Track Court at Karaikudi allowed the complainant's petition to recall himself as PW1 and mark his Income Tax Returns for 2023-2024 in a cheque dishonor case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The court found the ITR document relevant and necessary to establish financial capacity, which was questioned during cross-examination, and ruled that no prejudice would result to the accused as he retains full cross-examination rights on the document. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
27-Apr-2026
Disposed
Judicial Magistrate (Ftc ML), Karaikudi
-
21-Apr-2026
Orders
Judicial Magistrate (Ftc ML), Karaikudi
-
16-Apr-2026
Enquiry
Judicial Magistrate (Ftc ML), Karaikudi
-
10-Mar-2026
Counter
Judicial Magistrate (Ftc ML), Karaikudi
-
26-Feb-2026
Counter
Judicial Magistrate (Ftc ML), Karaikudi
-
17-Feb-2026
Counter
Judicial Magistrate (Ftc ML), Karaikudi
-
05-Feb-2026
Counter
Judicial Magistrate (Ftc ML), Karaikudi
-
20-Jan-2026
Counter
Judicial Magistrate (Ftc ML), Karaikudi
-
18-Dec-2025
Counter
Judicial Magistrate (Ftc ML), Karaikudi
-
27-Nov-2025
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
27-Nov-2025
Case filed
Registration No. 287/2025
Summary The Fast Track Court at Karaikudi allowed the complainant's petition to recall himself as PW1 and mark his Income Tax Returns for 2023-2024 in a cheque dishonor case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The court found the ITR document relevant and necessary to establish financial capacity, which was questioned during cross-examination, and ruled that no prejudice would result to the accused as he retains full cross-examination rights on the document. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts