Gujarat High Court
Vishal Electronics Thro Patel ... vs State Of Gujarat on 4 April, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/4518/2025 ORDER DATED: 04/04/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL)
NO. 4518 of 2025
In
F/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 30693 of 2024
=============================================
VISHAL ELECTRONICS THRO PATEL ASHOKBHAI AMBALAL
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
=============================================
Appearance:
MR. YASH MOHTA, ADVOCATE for SINGHANIA & CO. LLP(13090)
for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS DHWANI TRIPATHI, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
=============================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE S.V. PINTO
Date : 04/04/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. By way of the present application, the applicant has prayed to grant leave to appeal against the judgment and order dated 20.04.2024 passed by the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, N.I.Act Court No.33, Ahmedabad (hereinafter referred to as "the learned Trial Court") in Criminal Case No. 70120 of 2020.
3. Learned advocate Mr.Yash Mohta for the applicant submits that the applicant was doing business of electrical goods in the name and style of "Vishal Electricals" and the respondent Page 1 of 4 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Mon Apr 07 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Apr 07 22:47:02 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/4518/2025 ORDER DATED: 04/04/2025 undefined No.2 was an employee of the applicant, and thereafter, the respondent No.2 had started his own business in the name and style of "Shivshakti Electricals". The respondent No.2 used to take electronic items from the applicant and number of items were purchased towards which bills were issued. An amount of Rs.2,47,881/- was outstanding, towards which, the respondent No.2 issued cheque No.000008 dated 15.07.2020 for an amount of Rs.44.804/- and another cheque No.0000007 dated 20.07.2020 for an amount of Rs.2,03,077/- from his account with Kotak Mahindra Bank, G.R.Sterling Center Branch. Both the cheques were deposited by the applicant in his account with Bank of Baroda, Panch Kuva Branch but the said cheques returned unpaid with the endorsement "Funds Insufficient". The demand statutory notice was given, which was duly served to the respondent No.2 and the amount was not paid and hence, the applicant had filed the complaint under Section 138 of the N.I.Act before the Court of Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Ahmedabad, which culminated into Criminal Case No. 70120 of 2020. After the respondent No.2 was served with the summons and he appeared, the applicant produced all the documentary evidence including the account Page 2 of 4 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Mon Apr 07 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Apr 07 22:47:02 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/4518/2025 ORDER DATED: 04/04/2025 undefined statement and the tax invoice bills and proved that electronics items were taken by the respondent No.2 but the learned Trial Court has concluded that the account statement produced at Exh.25 was not proved. Learned advocate submits that the tax invoices produced at Exhs.26 to 43, all bear signature of the respondent No.2 and the document produced at Exh.25 reflect the same tax invoices. The documents where the signature of the respondent No.2 prove that the electronic goods were purchased by the respondent No.2 as he had personally come to collect the same but the learned Trial Court concluded that as there were no transport details, the bills were not proved. Learned advocate for the applicant submits that the learned Trial Court has not appreciated the documentary evidence in proper perspective and has passed the impugned judgment and order. The applicant has a good case on merits, and therefore, the present leave to appeal may be allowed.
4. Learned APP Ms. Dhwani Tripathi for the respondent
- State submits that the learned Trial Court has appreciated all the documents in proper perspective, and therefore, no interference of Page 3 of 4 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Mon Apr 07 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Apr 07 22:47:02 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/4518/2025 ORDER DATED: 04/04/2025 undefined this Court is required in the impugned judgment and order of acquittal passed by the learned Trial Court and the present application may be rejected.
5. Having heard advocates for the respective parties and on perusal of the paper book produced by the applicant, prima- facie, it appears that the electrical goods were taken by the respondent No.2 and all the invoices bear signature of the respondent No.2 but the learned Trial Court has not appreciated the same in proper perspective, and hence, the present application requires consideration and accordingly, is allowed.
(S. V. PINTO,J) F.S.KAZI Page 4 of 4 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Mon Apr 07 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Apr 07 22:47:02 IST 2025