Gujarat High Court
Mahindra And Mahindra Financial ... vs Jigneshkumar Navinchandra Patel on 7 July, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/12928/2025 ORDER DATED: 07/07/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL) NO. 12928
of 2025
In F/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 17127 of 2025
==========================================================
MAHINDRA AND MAHINDRA FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD. THROUGH POA
MRUNAL MUKESHBHAI DHOLAKIA
Versus
JIGNESHKUMAR NAVINCHANDRA PATEL & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR HB CHAMPAVAT(6149) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR. PRANAV DHAGAT, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 3
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE S.V. PINTO
Date : 07/07/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. The present application is filed by the applicant - original complainant seeking leave to file an appeal against the order dated 07.03.2025 passed by the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ahmedabad (Rural) (hereinafter referred to as the "learned trial Court") in Criminal Case No. 17808 of 2022, whereby the learned trial Court has dismissed the Criminal Case for want of prosecution under the provisions of Section 256(3) of Cr.P.C. and the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 came to be acquitted from the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as 'the NI Act").
Page 1 of 4 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Mon Jul 07 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Jul 07 23:35:34 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/12928/2025 ORDER DATED: 07/07/2025 undefined
2. Heard learned advocate Mr. H.B.Champavat appearing for the applicant, and learned APP Mr. Pranav Dhagat for the respondent No. 3 - State.
3. Learned advocate Mr. H.B.Champavat for the applicant submits that the applicant is engaged in the business of finance and the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 had taken the financial assistance to the tune of Rs.4,50,000/ for purchasing a motor vehicle. The respondent Nos. 1 and 2 had entered into a loan agreement and the loan was to be repaid in installments. Learned advocate for the applicant submits that some of the loan amount was repaid and towards the outstanding amount of Rs.1,57,000/-, the respondent Nos.1 and 2 had issued Cheque No. "176264" dated 25.07.2022 for the amount of Rs.1,57,000/- from their account with "ICICI Bank". The cheque was deposited by the applicant in his account with State Bank of India, S.G.Highway, Ahmedabad Branch, but the cheque returned unpaid with the endorsement "Funds Insufficient". The demand statutory notice was given, which was duly served to the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 but the loan amount was not repaid and hence the complaint was filed under Section 138 of the NI Act before the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ahmedabad (Rural), which came to be registered as Criminal Case No. 17808 of 2022. After the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 duly served with the summons, they have appeared before the Page 2 of 4 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Mon Jul 07 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Jul 07 23:35:34 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/12928/2025 ORDER DATED: 07/07/2025 undefined learned trial Court and the plea were recorded at Exh.8 on 06.01.2024 and thereafter the affidavit of examination-in-chief was filed by the applicant at Exh.14. During the pendency of the application, the authorized representative of the company had left the company and the authorized representative had to be substituted, and hence, the application was preferred at Exh.15 on 07.03.2024 for adjournment with a reason that the authorized representative has to be substituted but the learned trial Court was pleased to reject the application and by the impugned order below Exh.1, the complaint of the complainant came to be dismissed for non- prosecution. Learned advocate for the applicant submits that the applicant had filed the affidavit of examination-in-chief and all the documents that would rely upon by the list at Exh. 3 but the learned trial Court did not appreciate the same in proper perspective. Learned advocate submits that the applicant has a good case on merits and hence the application seeking leave to appeal must be allowed.
4. Learned APP Mr. Pranav Dhagat for the respondent No 3 - State and has submitted that necessary orders may be passed after perusing the copy of the impugned judgment and a copy of the Rojkam produced on record by the learned advocate for the applicant.
5. Considering the submissions of learned advocate for the applicant as also the copy of the Rojkam produced on record by the learned Page 3 of 4 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Mon Jul 07 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Jul 07 23:35:34 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/12928/2025 ORDER DATED: 07/07/2025 undefined advocate for the applicant, it appears that the entire evidence of the applicant including the affidavit of examination-in-chief and the documentary evidence were produced on record, but the learned trial Court has not appreicated the same in proper perspective and the impugned order came to be passed under Section 256 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and hence, the application seeking leave to appeal deserves consideration. Consequently, the same is allowed.
(S. V. PINTO,J) VVM Page 4 of 4 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Mon Jul 07 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Jul 07 23:35:34 IST 2025