Gujarat High Court
Davat Beverages Pvt. Ltd. Through ... vs State Of Gujarat on 15 July, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/12089/2025 ORDER DATED: 15/07/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION (FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL) NO. 12089
of 2025
In F/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 16059 of 2025
==========================================================
DAVAT BEVERAGES PVT. LTD. THROUGH SAVANBHAI RAJESHBHAI
KHANPARA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
APURVA K JANI(7057) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR PRANAV DHAGAT, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE S.V. PINTO
Date : 15/07/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. The present application is filed by the applicant company "Davat Beverages Pvt. Ltd." - original complainant through its the authorized person seeking leave to file an appeal against the judgment and order passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gondal, (hereinafter referred to as the "learned Trial Court") in Criminal Case No. 2206 of 2022 on 30.01.2025, whereby, the respondent nos.2 to 4 - original accused came to be acquitted from the offence under Section 138 and 141 of Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as "N.I.Act").
Page 1 of 5 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Tue Jul 15 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 15 23:24:15 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/12089/2025 ORDER DATED: 15/07/2025 undefined
2. Heard learned advocate Mr.Apurv K. Jani for the applicant and learned APP Mr. Pranav Dhagat for the respondent No.1 - State.
3. Learned advocate Mr.Apurv K. Jani for the applicant submits that the applicant "Davat Beverages Pvt. Ltd." had entered into a transaction to transfer a plant situated in Nasik, Maharashtra to the respondent no. 2 - Max Beverages and a MOU was executed between the parties and accordingly, the plant was transferred to the respondent no. 2. That applicant had an electricity power connection with Maharashtra State Electricity Board (MSEB) Consumer No. 05805925520 and the power connection was to be transferred to the respondent no. 2, for which, the NOC and other documents were executed by the applicant. The security deposit amount of Rs.13,11,138/- paid by the applicant was to be transferred to the respondent no. 2 and the amount of security deposit was to be given by the respondent no. 2 to the applicant, for which, the respondent no. 2 issued cheque no. 067412 dated 15.07.2022 for the amount of Rs.13,11,138/- from their account with State Bank of India, Govindnagar, Nasik Page 2 of 5 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Tue Jul 15 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 15 23:24:15 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/12089/2025 ORDER DATED: 15/07/2025 undefined Branch. The cheque was deposited by the applicant in their account, but the cheque returned unpaid with the endorsement "Today's Opening Balance Insufficient". The demand statutory notice was given, which was duly served to the respondent nos. 2 to 3 but they did not sent any reply and did not repay the amount within the stipulated time, and hence, the applicant filed a complaint under Section 138 of N.I.Act before the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gondal, which came to be registered as Criminal Case No. 2206 of 2022. After the respondent nos.2 to 4 were duly served with the summons, the respondent no. 2 did not appear before the learned Trial Court and the respondent Nos. 3 and 4 appeared before the learned Trial Court. After plea of the respondents was recorded, the applicant stepped into witness box and produce the oral and documentary evidence on record in support of the case. The applicant produced all the documentary evidence to prove that the transaction in fact had taken place and also produced the copy of the NOC for transfer MSEB connection at Exh.48 and Memorandum of Understanding between the parties at Exh.49, the undertaking of new consumer Annexure-A at Exh.58 and also the Minutes of Meeting at Exhs.59 and 60 and proved Page 3 of 5 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Tue Jul 15 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 15 23:24:15 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/12089/2025 ORDER DATED: 15/07/2025 undefined beyond reasonable doubts that the amount of Rs.13,11,138/- was the legally enforceable due from the respondent nos. 2 to 4. The learned Trial Court did not appreciate the documents in proper perspective and concluded that the legally enforceable amount was not proved and the authority given by the company to the applicant to file the complaint was not proper. Learned advocate for the applicant submits that the authority was given prior to filing of the complaint and it was a valid authority but the same has not been appreciated in proper perspective. Learned advocate further submits that the applicant has a good case on merits and has urged this Court to allow the present application.
4. Learned APP Mr. Pranav Dhagat for the respondent - State has submitted that the learned Trial Court has considered the evidence on record and has passed the impugned judgment and order considering the settled principles of law 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 produced by the learned advocate for the applicant, prima-facie, it appears that the Page 4 of 5 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Tue Jul 15 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 15 23:24:15 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/12089/2025 ORDER DATED: 15/07/2025 undefined learned Trial Court has failed to appreciate the evidence on record in proper perspective, and hence, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and in the considered opinion of this Court, the application deserves to be considered. Consequently, the application for leave to appeal is granted and disposed off accordingly.
(S. V. PINTO,J) F.S.KAZI Page 5 of 5 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Tue Jul 15 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 15 23:24:15 IST 2025