Jothi Mani vs Rajeswari Advocate - R.M.Raj — 65/2024

Case under Code of Criminal Procedure Section 374(3). Disposed: Contested--Allowed on 28th April 2026.

CRLA - Criminal Appeal

CNR: TNTJ010031572024

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

13-03-2024

Filing Number

2386/2024

Filing Date

14-03-2024

Registration No

65/2024

Registration Date

15-03-2024

Court

Principal District Court, Thanjavur

Judge

1-Principal District Judge, Thanjavur

Decision Date

28th April 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Allowed

Acts & Sections

CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 Section 374(3)
NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT, 1881 Section 138

Petitioner(s)

Jothi Mani

Adv. Parthiban Kaliyamoorthy

Respondent(s)

Rajeswari Advocate - R.M.Raj

Hearing History

Judge: 1-Principal District Judge, Thanjavur

28-04-2026

Disposed

22-04-2026

Judgement

16-04-2026

Judgement

10-04-2026

Judgement

30-03-2026

Judgement

Final Orders / Judgements

28-04-2026
Copy of Judgment

Summary: The Principal Sessions Judge acquitted the accused (P. Jothimani) of cheque dishonor charges under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, setting aside the trial court's conviction and one-year imprisonment sentence plus ₹30 lakh compensation order. The appellate court found that the cheque was issued as security during a police-mediated settlement of a civil property dispute rather than to discharge a legally enforceable debt, and the complainant failed to establish the existence of such debt, thereby successfully rebutting statutory presumptions under the NI Act. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The Principal Sessions Judge acquitted the accused (P. Jothimani) of cheque dishonor charges under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, setting aside the trial court's conviction and one-year imprisonment sentence plus ₹30 lakh compensation order. The appellate court found that the cheque was issued as security during a police-mediated settlement of a civil property dispute rather than to discharge a legally enforceable debt, and the complainant failed to establish the existence of such debt, thereby successfully rebutting statutory presumptions under the NI Act. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

Principal District Court, Thanjavur All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case