Sameer Sudhakar Mhatre vs Mithun Rambhau Madhavi And Anr
2025 Latest Caselaw 4826 Bom

Bombay High Court

Sameer Sudhakar Mhatre vs Mithun Rambhau Madhavi And Anr on 26 August, 2025

Author: S. M. Modak

Bench: S. M. Modak

                                                                                          20-WP-2232-2025.doc


                             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                  CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                  CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.2232 OF 2025
SATISH
RAMCHANDRA
SANGAR                Sameer Sudhakar Mhatre                                              ...Petitioner
Digitally signed by
SATISH RAMCHANDRA             V/s.
SANGAR
Date: 2025.08.26
19:59:29 +0530        Mithun Rambhau Madhavi and Anr.                                     ...Respondents
                                                                  *****
                      Mr.Darshan     Juikar                      a/w Advocates for Petitioner.
                      Mr.Himanshu Indise:-
                      Ms.Sangita E. Phad:-                           APP for Respondent No.2-State.

                                                               *****
                                                          CORAM :          S. M. MODAK, J.

                                                          DATE       :     26th AUGUST 2025
                      P. C. :-

1. Heard learned Advocate for the Petitioner/Accused.

2. He is facing prosecution for the offence punishable under

Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 ("NI Act"). He

has not cross-examined the Complainant and that is why, it was closed

on 11th February 2025. He applied for setting aside the same order. It

was refused on 25th March 2025.

3. Now the matter is posted for judgment and today's date is given.

The online roznama is read over from the mobile handset by the

learned Advocate for the Petitioner.

4. Apart from wrong approach in rejecting the the earlier prayers,

20-WP-2232-2025.doc

there is also emphasis on the harshness of the learned Judge in

imposing cost of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) for

cancelling the warrant on 25th March 2025 and even directing the

Petitioner to deposit 20% of the cheque amount. The submission is

this was too harsh and the principles of natural justice were not

followed.

5. There is appearance on behalf of the Respondent No.1. Today no

one is present. If it is presumed that today matter is fixed for judgment

and if the judgment is delivered, the Petitioner will lose an opportunity

to prosecute this Petition. So irrespective of merits of the case, the facts

and circumstances justify passing of an order so that the learned Judge

will adjourn the matter for pronouncing of the judgment. Hence

liberty is granted to the Petitioner to request the trial Court to defer the

pronouncing of the judgment at least till 4 th September 2025. This

direction will come into operation only if the judgment is not delivered

upto 5.00 p.m. The Petitioner to inform the trial Court by filing

necessary purshis. Additionally, the Petitioner to communicate this

order to the learned Advocate for Respondent No.1.

6. Stand over to 4th September 2025.

[S. M. MODAK, J.]