Gujarat High Court
Mukeshkumar Kantilal Parmar vs Ronak M. Makwana on 11 August, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/12094/2025 ORDER DATED: 11/08/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL) NO. 12094
of 2025
In F/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 22202 of 2025
==========================================================
MUKESHKUMAR KANTILAL PARMAR
Versus
RONAK M. MAKWANA & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR MAULIN G PANDYA(3999) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR ROHAN N. SHAH, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE S.V. PINTO
Date : 11/08/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. The present application is filed by the applicant - original complainant seeking leave to file an appeal against the judgment and order dated 06.02.2025 passed by the learned Additional Senior Civil Judge, Kalol (hereinafter referred to as the "learned Trial Court") in Criminal Case No. 2645 of 2023, whereby, the learned Trial Court was pleased to acquit the accused from the offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to "the N.I.Act" for short). Page 1 of 4 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Thu Aug 14 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Aug 14 21:45:05 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/12094/2025 ORDER DATED: 11/08/2025 undefined
2. Heard learned advocate Mr. Maulin G. Pandya for the applicant and learned APP Mr.Rohan N. Shah for the respondent State.
3. Learned advocate Mr. Maulin G. Pandya for the applicant submits that some transactions have taken place between the applicant and the respondent no. 1 and out of the same transaction, the applicant had to take Rs.25,00,000/- from the respondent no. 1, towards which, the respondent no. 1 had gave cheque no. 000067 dated 15.01.2022 for the amount of Rs.5,00,000/- from his account with IDFC First Bank, Vatva Branch. The cheque was deposited by the applicant in his account with State Bank of India, Dindoli, Surat Branch, but the cheque returned unpaid with the endorsement "Funds Insufficient". The demand statutory notice was given, which was duly served to the respondent no. 1, but the respondent no. 1 did not reply the notice and did not pay the amount within the stipulated period, and hence, the applicant filed the complaint under Section 138 of the N.I.Act before the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Page 2 of 4 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Thu Aug 14 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Aug 14 21:45:05 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/12094/2025 ORDER DATED: 11/08/2025 undefined Kalol, which came to be registered as Criminal Case No. 2645 of 2023. The respondent no. 2 was duly served with the summons and he appeared before the learned Trial Court and his plea was recorded at Exh.11 on 24.05.2024. That at the time of filing the complaint, the applicant had produced his affidavit-in-chief at Exh.4 and the documents on which he relied upon filed at Exh.3 and the applicant had also preferred an application at Exh.5 for exhibiting the documents, which was kept pending for hearing. During trial, the the applicant was pleased to take the bail of the respondent no. 1 but by the impugned order dated 06.02.2025, the learned Trial Court was pleased to dismiss the complaint. Learned advocate for the applicant submits that the applicant is working in the Police Department as a P.S.I. in Surat and was not able to appear before the learned Trial Court. Learned advocate further submits that the learned Trial Court has, without appreciating the evidence in proper perspective, dismissed the complaint. Learned advocate submits that the applicant has a good case on merits and the application seeking leave to appeal must be granted. Page 3 of 4 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Thu Aug 14 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Aug 14 21:45:05 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/12094/2025 ORDER DATED: 11/08/2025 undefined
4. Learned APP Mr.Rohan N. Shah for the respondent State has submitted that the learned Trial Court has considered the absence of the applicant and has passed the impugned order of acquittal and hence, the leave to appeal may not be granted.
5. Considering the submissions of learned advocate for the applicant as also on perusal of the paper book on record and the judgment and order of acquittal, prima-facie, it appears that the documents have not been properly appreciated in proper perspective. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case in the considered opinion of this Court the application deserves to be considered. Consequently, the application seeking leave to appeal is granted and disposed off accordingly.
(S. V. PINTO,J) F.S. KAZI Page 4 of 4 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Thu Aug 14 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Aug 14 21:45:05 IST 2025