Call Now
+91 8919811504
asrss.seva@gmail.com
Icon-facebook Instagram Whatsapp Youtube
Case-Status
Donet Now

Author name: officialindiasinfinity@gmail.com

Cheque Bounce

Cheque Bounce Case

/

Our Successful Legal Cases & Services Arihant Credit Co-operative Society vs Anita Sonkar Case Type: Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act (Cheque Bounce Case) Issue: A cheque issued by Anita Sonkar in favor of Arihant Credit Co-operative Society was dishonored upon presentation. This caused financial loss to the Society and led to legal complications. Our Work: Conducted a complete legal assessment of the matter and prepared all necessary documentation. Represented the client regularly before the Court on every hearing date. Ensured timely filing of all required court processes to avoid delays. Presented the case effectively and strategically before the Court. Result: Due to consistent and effective legal representation, the Court issued an arrest warrant against Anita Sonkar. Subsequently, to avoid arrest, Anita Sonkar settled the matter by paying the entire outstanding amount along with compensation to Arihant Credit Co-operative Society, and the case was successfully disposed of. Our Legal Expertise & Success Stories Our team has successfully represented clients in a wide range of legal matters. Through experience, strong legal strategy, and consistent court representation, we have resolved numerous complex cases and secured favorable outcomes for our clients. Our objective has always been to provide sound legal advice and effective legal representation. Key Areas of Success ✔ Cheque Bounce Cases (Section 138 NI Act) Successfully represented clients in multiple cheque dishonor matters, helping them recover outstanding dues and achieve favorable settlements. ✔ Property Disputes Assisted clients in land and property-related disputes through thorough document verification and strong legal representation. ✔ Criminal Matters Provided effective representation in various criminal cases and secured relief for clients. ✔ Family Disputes Resolved family disputes through legal proceedings and amicable settlements. ✔ Recovery & Financial Disputes Successfully assisted clients in recovering dues and resolving financial disputes. Representative Cases Mayur Solanki vs Tulika Solanki Case Type: Maintenance and Divorce Matter Court: Bilaspur District Court / Jabalpur District Court A maintenance case was filed before the Bilaspur Court. Our team effectively represented the client and presented relevant documents and facts before the Court, resulting in favorable relief. The divorce proceedings are currently pending before the Jabalpur Court, where our team continues to represent the client. Property Dispute Case Case Type: Property Dispute Court: Jabalpur District Court A dispute arose regarding family property between two parties. Our team prepared the matter based on historical documents, registered deeds, and witness evidence. Following effective representation, the judgment was delivered in favor of our client. Bail Matter in Criminal Case Case Type: Bail Matter Court: Sessions Court, Jabalpur The client was accused in a criminal case and was in judicial custody. Our team filed a bail application supported by legal provisions and evidence, resulting in the grant of bail by the Court.   Domestic Violence Case Case Type: Domestic Violence Matter Court: Family Court, Jabalpur The client was facing domestic violence. Our team filed the necessary applications and assisted in obtaining appropriate legal relief. Maintenance Case Case Type: Maintenance Matter Court: Family Court, Jabalpur In a matrimonial dispute, a maintenance claim was filed. Our team presented relevant financial and factual documents, helping the client secure appropriate relief. Cheque Bounce Case Case Type: Cheque Bounce (Section 138 NI Act) Court: Jabalpur District Court A case was initiated due to dishonor of a cheque arising from a commercial transaction. Our team presented banking records and documentary evidence, leading to a favorable outcome for the client. Land Possession Case Case Type: Land Possession Dispute Court: Jabalpur District Court The matter involved illegal possession of land. Through documentary evidence and effective court representation, our team assisted the client in recovering possession.   Anticipatory Bail Case Case Type: Anticipatory Bail Court: Sessions Court, Jabalpur The client apprehended arrest in a criminal matter. Our team filed an anticipatory bail application and successfully secured relief. Consumer Complaint Case Case Type: Consumer Dispute Court: District Consumer Forum, Jabalpur The dispute arose from deficiency in service. Through proper documentation and legal submissions, relief was obtained for the client. Partnership Dispute Case Case Type: Partnership Dispute Court: Jabalpur District Court A business partnership dispute was brought before the Court. Our team relied upon contractual and financial records to present the client’s case and facilitate resolution. Divorce Settlement Case Case Type: Divorce Settlement Court: Family Court, Jabalpur The spouses had been involved in prolonged litigation. Through negotiations and legal assistance, our team facilitated an amicable settlement and peaceful resolution. Injunction Case Case Type: Injunction Matter Court: Jabalpur District Court An injunction was sought to prevent unauthorized construction on disputed property. The Court granted appropriate relief after considering the facts presented.   Labour Dispute Case Case Type: Labour Dispute Court: Labour Court, Jabalpur The employee had been terminated without valid justification. Our team represented the client before the Labour Court and obtained relief. Criminal Defence Case Case Type: Criminal Defence Court: Sessions Court, Jabalpur Serious allegations were made against the client. Our team presented a strong defence based on facts and evidence, resulting in relief for the client. Legal Aid Matters Case Type: Free Legal Assistance Our team regularly provides free legal aid to economically weaker and deserving individuals. We have successfully assisted many people in obtaining justice. High Court Matters Criminal Appeal Matter Court: Madhya Pradesh High Court A criminal appeal was filed challenging an order passed by a lower court. After detailed legal analysis and effective arguments, relief was granted to the client. Anticipatory Bail Petition Court: Madhya Pradesh High Court The client faced the possibility of arrest in a serious criminal matter. Our team filed an anticipatory bail petition and secured relief through effective advocacy. Criminal Revision Case Court: Madhya Pradesh High Court A criminal revision petition was filed challenging a lower court order. The Court considered the legal issues raised and appropriate relief was obtained.   Writ Petition (Service Matter) Court: Madhya Pradesh High Court A writ petition was filed in a service-related dispute involving a government employee. The Court granted relief after hearing the matter. Property Dispute Appeal Court: Madhya Pradesh High Court An appeal was filed against

Civil Law

Civil

/

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE Justice Maninder S. Bhatti ON THE    xxxxx DAY OF _xxxxx_, 2023 FIRST APPEAL / CIVIL SUIT No/ xxxxx of 2015 X … Appellant / Plaintiff Versus Y … Respondent / Defendant   Appearance: Shri Amit Singh Raghuvanshi, Advocate for the Appellant. Shri _R__, Advocate for the Respondent. JUDGMENT / ORDER The present First Appeal has been preferred by the Appellant/Plaintiff challenging the judgment and decree passed by the learned Civil Court whereby the claim of the plaintiff regarding title, possession, permanent injunction, and mutation in respect of the disputed agricultural land was partly rejected. The appellant has approached this Court contending that the impugned judgment is contrary to law and evidence available on record. Background of the Dispute The record reveals that the parties are close relatives and a serious dispute arose between them concerning ancestral agricultural land situated at Village imlai_, Tehsil Kundam_, District Jabalpur. The said land remained under family ownership and use for several years. However, with the passage of time, disputes surfaced regarding ownership rights, partition, demarcation boundaries, possession, cultivation rights, and entry of names in the revenue records. The case of the Plaintiff X is that the disputed land devolved upon him through lawful succession from his forefathers and after family partition, the said land fell to his share. In support of his claim, he produced Khasra entries, Khatauni records, B-1 extracts, land maps, demarcation reports, revenue receipts, and other documentary evidence. On the other hand, the Defendant Y claimed equal ownership and asserted that he had been in possession of the land for a considerable period. According to him, the plaintiff was attempting to obtain mutation in the revenue record unilaterally. As the dispute escalated, several attempts were made through family elders, village Panchayat members, and mediators to settle the matter amicably. However, no final settlement could be achieved. Consequently, in the year 2015, the plaintiff instituted a civil suit before the competent Court seeking the following reliefs: Declaration of title. Confirmation of possession. Permanent injunction. Restraint against interference by the defendant. Mutation in the revenue records. Relevant Legal Provisions The present matter primarily involves the following legal provisions: Section 34 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 – Suit for declaration of legal character or right. Section 38 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 – Grant of perpetual/permanent injunction. Section 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – Jurisdiction of Civil Courts. Relevant provisions of the Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code, 1959 relating to mutation and revenue entries. General principles governing succession, co-ownership, and possession. Decision of the Trial Court After recording evidence and hearing the parties, the learned Trial Court held that there existed a genuine dispute between the parties with regard to the land. However, relying upon certain material, the Trial Court did not grant full relief to the plaintiff and partly dismissed the suit. Being aggrieved by the said judgment and decree, the plaintiff preferred the present First Appeal. Submissions on Behalf of the Appellant Learned counsel for the appellant, Shri Amit Singh Raghuvanshi, Advocate, advanced elaborate, structured, and persuasive arguments assailing the findings of the Trial Court. He submitted that the learned Trial Court failed to properly appreciate the documentary evidence placed on record and ignored crucial material documents which clearly establish the appellant’s lawful right over the land. Shri Amit Singh Raghuvanshi invited the attention of this Court to the following material: Khasra and Khatauni entries reflecting the appellant’s rights. Demarcation report identifying the boundaries of the disputed land. Revenue tax and land revenue receipts showing payment by the appellant. Oral testimony of witnesses supporting the appellant’s possession and cultivation. It was further argued that the respondent’s case is based mainly on oral assertions and alleged possession, whereas title to immovable property must be determined on the strength of reliable documentary evidence. Learned counsel contended that once the appellant had established lawful succession and supporting revenue records, he could not be deprived of his rightful share merely on account of obstruction by the respondent. He further submitted that the Trial Court committed a legal error in misapplying the principles under Sections 34 and 38 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963. Shri Amit Singh Raghuvanshi also emphasized that if the respondent is permitted to interfere with the land, the appellant would suffer irreparable loss, as the agricultural property is a vital source of livelihood for him and his family. He therefore prayed that the appeal be allowed, the impugned judgment be set aside, and the appellant’s title and possession be declared. Submissions on Behalf of the Respondent Learned counsel for the respondent opposed the appeal and submitted that the judgment of the Trial Court is legal and proper and does not warrant interference. It was argued that the respondent has been in possession of the land for a long time and also has a share in the property. It was further contended that possession and actual enjoyment of land are relevant factors and the plaintiff cannot claim exclusive ownership. It was also submitted that no final family partition had ever taken place and therefore the appellant cannot assert absolute title. Consideration by the Court Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the entire record with due care. This Court arrives at the following conclusions: (1) Importance of Documentary Evidence In disputes relating to agricultural land, revenue records, demarcation reports, succession documents, and tax receipts carry significant evidentiary value. The documents produced by the appellant form a consistent chain supporting his claim. (2) Nature of the Respondent’s Claim The respondent has not produced any cogent documentary evidence sufficient to establish exclusive title. His defence rests substantially on possession and oral assertions. (3) Error in the Trial Court Judgment The Trial Court failed to give due weight to material documentary evidence and did not adequately consider relevant testimony, resulting in an erroneous conclusion. (4) Assistance Rendered by Counsel This Court specifically records that Shri Amit Singh

Other Criminal Matters

CRIMINAL CASE

/

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND RAMESH PHADKE ON THE 1st OF DECEMBER, 2025 MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 55265 of 2025 U … Applicant Versus The State of Madhya Pradesh Appearance: Shri Amit Singh Raghuvanshi, Advocate for the Applicant. Shri S, Public Prosecutor for the State.   The present first application under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicant seeking grant of anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No. xxx of 2025 registered at Police Station Dehat, District Bhind (M.P.), for the offence punishable under Section 108 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the deceased was married to the present applicant in the year 2010 according to Hindu rites and customs. Out of the said wedlock, two children were born. For several years, the matrimonial life of the parties continued normally, however, with the passage of time, disputes allegedly arose between them on account of strained relations, incompatibility, and allegations levelled by the complainant side regarding the applicant’s association with another woman. It is alleged that due to these disputes, frequent quarrels took place between the husband and wife. The prosecution further alleges that the deceased felt neglected and mentally harassed. According to the complainant, the applicant had stopped maintaining cordial relations with the deceased and had expressed unwillingness to continue the matrimonial relationship. It is further alleged that the applicant initiated proceedings for dissolution of marriage before the competent Family Court. According to the prosecution, the deceased was emotionally disturbed due to the aforesaid circumstances. It is further alleged that family elders and local Panchayat members attempted reconciliation between the parties, but the dispute could not be resolved. Thereafter, on 21.09.2025, the deceased was found hanging in a room of the matrimonial house and thus committed suicide. On the basis of merg inquiry, statements of witnesses, and allegations made by the complainant side, the present crime was registered against the applicant for the offence punishable under Section 108 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, alleging abetment of suicide. Learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Amit Singh Raghuvanshi, Advocate, submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated due to emotional pressure and social resentment arising after the unfortunate incident. It was vehemently contended that the entire prosecution story, even if accepted in its entirety, does not disclose the necessary ingredients required to constitute an offence of abetment of suicide. Learned counsel submitted that to attract Section 108 of BNS, there must be clear mens rea, direct instigation, active participation, or intentional aid in the commission of suicide. In the present case, no such material exists. There is no allegation of any specific act immediately preceding the incident that could be construed as incitement or provocation by the applicant. It was further argued by Shri Amit Singh Raghuvanshi that matrimonial disputes, differences in temperament, domestic quarrels, or even pendency of divorce proceedings, though unfortunate, cannot automatically be converted into a criminal charge of abetment of suicide unless there is cogent and proximate evidence showing direct involvement of the accused. Learned counsel further submitted that the filing of a divorce petition before the Family Court was a lawful remedy available to the applicant under personal law and the same cannot be treated as an illegal act or evidence of criminal intent. It was argued that exercising a legal remedy cannot be equated with instigation to commit suicide. It was also contended that the prosecution case is based largely on assumptions, sentiments, and generalized allegations made after the death of the deceased. No independent witness has stated any overt act of instigation by the applicant. No suicide note has been recovered from the place of incident. There is also no electronic evidence, message, or communication showing that the applicant ever compelled the deceased to take the extreme step. Learned counsel Shri Amit Singh Raghuvanshi further submitted that the applicant has clean antecedents, is a permanent resident of the district, and there is no likelihood of absconding or tampering with evidence. The applicant is ready and willing to cooperate with the investigation and abide by any condition imposed by this Court. It was next argued that custodial interrogation of the applicant is not required, as the case rests primarily on documentary material and witness statements already available with the prosecution. Arrest of the applicant at this stage would serve no fruitful purpose except causing humiliation and unnecessary curtailment of his liberty. In support of his submissions, learned counsel placed reliance upon settled principles laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and various High Courts that mere harassment, strained matrimonial relations, or emotional incompatibility, in the absence of direct instigation or active aid, do not constitute abetment of suicide. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application and prayed for rejection of the same. It was submitted that the allegations against the applicant are serious in nature. According to the prosecution, the conduct of the applicant had caused immense mental cruelty to the deceased, who was left with no option but to commit suicide. It was argued that the applicant had distanced himself from the deceased, neglected family responsibilities, and insisted upon separation. Such continuous conduct, according to the State, had a direct bearing on the fragile mental condition of the deceased. It was therefore submitted that a thorough custodial interrogation may be necessary for fair investigation. Heard learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the case diary as well as material available on record. This Court is conscious of the settled legal position that while considering an application for anticipatory bail, a detailed appreciation of evidence is not required. At the same time, the Court is required to examine whether prima facie custodial interrogation is necessary, whether the accusations disclose a case warranting arrest, and whether the applicant is likely to misuse liberty. Upon consideration of the material available, it appears that the allegations primarily arise

Cheque Bounce

Cheque Bounce

/

A Complainant Versus Mrs. U                                                                    Respondent   That the Complainant ‘A’ is the President of an organization engaged in the business of finance, wherein the Complainant’s institution provides business loans to needy women through women’s self-help groups. That, by way of a loan, a sum amounting to ₹7,50,000/- (in figures: Seven Lakh Fifty Thousand Rupees) was disbursed to the group of the Accused/Respondent, for which the Respondent/Accused served as the Guarantor. The Accused/Respondent was also the Leader of the said group. The aforementioned loan taken by the Respondent’s group was required to be repaid within the stipulated timeframe. The Respondent’s group failed to repay the said loan, along with the accrued interest thereon, by the aforementioned date. That, subsequent to the expiration of the aforesaid date, the Complainant personally contacted the Respondent and demanded the repayment of the principal loan amount and the interest outstanding thereon. That, in response to the Complainant’s demand, the Respondent provided an assurance regarding the repayment of the outstanding loan and interest; and, for the purpose of effecting said payment, the Respondent signed and issued to the Complainant a Cheque bearing No. xxxx, dated 12/09/2023, drawn on xxxx Bank, Branch xxxxx, Jabalpur, for a sum of ₹2,45,504/- (in words: Two Lakh Forty-Five Thousand Five Hundred Four Rupees), which amount comprised both the principal outstanding loan amount and the accrued interest. The Respondent gave an assurance that, upon presenting the cheque to the bank on or after the date specified therein, the payment of the cheque amount would definitely be realized. That, acting in accordance with the Respondent’s instructions, the Complainant presented the said cheque for encashment at the account of ‘A’ (the Complainant’s organization)—Account No. xxxxxxxxxxxx, [Bank Name] Limited, Jabalpur. However, on 05-12-2023, the bank returned the cheque to the Complainant without making any payment, accompanied by a Return Memo bearing the remark: “Insufficient Funds.” The Complainant was unable to receive payment of the amount specified in the cheque issued by the Respondent in discharge of her aforementioned liability. That subsequently, the Complainant contacted the Respondent via mobile phone and through his collection agent to inform her of the dishonor of the cheque and to demand payment of the amount inscribed thereon; however, the Respondent failed to provide any satisfactory response. Instead, stating that she would make the payment at a future date once funds became available, the Respondent refused to engage further with the Complainant and declined to return the amount owed to him. That thereafter, within the stipulated time limit, the Complainant dispatched a Legal Demand Notice dated 08.12.2023 to the Respondent via Registered Post on 11.12.2023 through his counsel. However, on 12.12.2023, the Respondent refused to accept the said notice. Consequently, the Complainant has been compelled to file this complaint before this Honorable Court. A copy of the notice dated 08.12.2023 is annexed hereto as Exhibit-3, along with a printout obtained from the internet confirming the Respondent’s refusal to accept the said notice on 12.12.2023. That the Respondent issued the aforementioned cheque in fulfillment of her legal liability towards the Complainant and provided assurances that payment of the amount specified therein would be duly received. However, acting with fraudulent intent and with the specific motive of misappropriating the Complainant’s funds, the Respondent deliberately issued a cheque drawn on a “closed account,” which subsequently resulted in its dishonor. This act committed by the Respondent constitutes a punishable offense falling within the purview of Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Therefore, it would be just and equitable to punish the Respondent in this case with an appropriate penalty in accordance with the law, and to direct the Respondent to pay the Complainant a sum equivalent to double the amount specified in the cheque, inclusive of damages, costs, and interest. That since the said cheque was dishonored at the Jabalpur branch of xxx Bank Limited—where the Complainant maintains an account—this Honorable Court possesses full territorial jurisdiction to hear this matter. That the said cheque was returned dishonored on 06.12.2023; subsequently, within the statutory period of 30 days, the Complainant, through his counsel, dispatched a legal notice to the Respondent on 11.12.2023. As the Respondent refused to accept the said notice on 12.12.2023, and upon the expiration of the 15-day period stipulated in the notice, the Complainant has filed this complaint before this Honorable Court within the prescribed statutory period of 30 days. That the Complainant has affixed the requisite court fee stamp on the complaint petition, calculated in accordance with the value of the cheque amount. That the Complainant has submitted the documents listed in the accompanying schedule along with this complaint, and expressly reserves the right to submit further documents in the future. Justice was secured in this cheque bounce case thanks to the exceptional legal advocacy of Mr. Amit Singh Raghuvanshi. His professional conduct is highly commendable. The Honorable Judge subsequently pronounced the final order in this matter. Present for the Complainant: Mr. Amit Singh Raghuvanshi. Present for the Accused: None. The case is listed for the appearance of the Accused. The arrest warrants previously issued in this case have not been received back, whether executed or unexecuted. A perusal of the case records clearly indicates that although arrest warrants were issued against the Accused on previous hearing dates, the presence of the Accused could not be secured. The arrest warrants issued against the Accused remain unexecuted, thereby giving rise to the inference that there is no likelihood of apprehending the Accused in the near future. Therefore, the accused, Smt. Urmila Upadhyay, is hereby declared a fugitive under Section 299 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. A permanent warrant of arrest shall be issued against the accused, and the Officer-in-Charge of the concerned police station… The warrant shall be handed over to the concerned officer, and an acknowledgment of receipt shall be obtained in the Order Sheet. An endorsement shall be recorded on the warrant stating that the offense is of a bailable nature and that the accused is to be

error: Content is protected !!
Scroll to Top