MANI vs SIVAKUMAR — 640/2026

Case under Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138. Disposed: Contested--Allowed on 06th April 2026.

Case disposed

CRLMP - Criminal Miscellaneous Petition

CNR: TNTM010010502026

Filing Number

743/2026

Filing Date

23-Mar-2026

Registration No

640/2026

Registration Date

24-Mar-2026

Court

District and Sessions Court, Tiruvannamalai

Judge

1-Principal District & Sessions Judge

Decision Date

06-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Allowed

Last updated 06-Jul-2026

Acts & Sections

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.MANI

    Adv. THIRU. I.SEKAR

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.SIVAKUMAR

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 06-Apr-2026

    Bail orderView PDF

    Case Summary: 640/2026 (Mani v. Sivakumar) The Principal Sessions Judge, Tiruvannamalai, allowed Mani's bail petition in a Negotiable Instruments Act Section 138 cheque bouncing case. The court considered Mani's 20-day incarceration, permanent residence, lack of serious objections, and the case's readiness for trial in granting bail. Mani was released on a Rs. 10,000 bond with two sureties, subject to daily reporting to the magistrate for 30 days and conditions prohibiting witness tampering, leaving the jurisdiction, and committing further offences. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 06-Apr-2026

    Disposed

    Principal District & Sessions Judge

  4. 25-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  5. 23-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 640/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: 640/2026 (Mani v. Sivakumar) The Principal Sessions Judge, Tiruvannamalai, allowed Mani's bail petition in a Negotiable Instruments Act Section 138 cheque bouncing case. The court considered Mani's 20-day incarceration, permanent residence, lack of serious objections, and the case's readiness for trial in granting bail. Mani was released on a Rs. 10,000 bond with two sureties, subject to daily reporting to the magistrate for 30 days and conditions prohibiting witness tampering, leaving the jurisdiction, and committing further offences. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case