[Cites 4, Cited by 0]
Bombay High Court
Sapna Anil Gupta vs Tulsidas R. Sapalinga And Anr. on 18 March, 2026
Author: R.N. Laddha
Bench: R.N. Laddha
Digitally signed by SMITA
SMITA JOHNSON JOHNSON GONSALVES
GONSALVES Date: 2026.03.19 00:43:21
2026:BHC-AS:13471
+0530
sg 40.apeal961-08.docx
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
Criminal Appeal No.961 of 2008
Sapna Anil Gupta
Age: 31 years, Occ: Service,
R/o: 203, Vankateshwara Nagar,
Building No.2, 'A' Wing, Cabin Road,
Bhayander (East),
District - Thane ... Appellant
versus
1. Tulsidas R Sapalinga
Age: Adult, Occ: Business,
R/o: A-303, Shri Vignahar,
Third Floor, Besides Bhavika School,
Near Viththal Temple,
Kharegaon, Kalva, Dist.- Thane
2. The State of Maharashtra
(Notice to be served on APP,
High Court, Bombay). ... Respondents
----
Ms Manjiri Parasnis, a/w. Ms Surabhi Sunil Kirtikudue, for the
appellant.
None for respondent No.1.
Ms MR Tidke, APP, for respondent No.2/ State.
----
Coram: R.N. Laddha, J.
Date: 18 March 2026.
P.C.:
. Heard the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the
__________________________________________________
18 March 2026
sg 40.apeal961-08.docx
appellant and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor
representing the respondent/State.
2. The present appeal arises from the Judgment and Order
dated 2 May 2008 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate
First Class, Thane, in S.C.C. No. 979 of 2006, whereby
respondent No.1 herein was acquitted of the offence
punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments
Act, 1881.
3. The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant
and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the
respondent/State, placing reliance on the judgment of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in Celestium Financial vs A
Gnanasekaran, 2025 SCC OnLine 1320, jointly submit that the
appellant possesses a statutory right to prefer an appeal against
an order of acquittal under the proviso to Section 372 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. It is therefore contended
that the present appeal may be appropriately transferred to the
competent Sessions Court. It is further submitted that such
transfer would be necessary to ensure that the appellant is
enable to effectively exercise the statutory right of appeal and is
not deprived of an available forum. Reliance is also placed
upon the decisions in Pankaj Mehta vs Vishal Hundar, 2026
__________________________________________________
18 March 2026
sg 40.apeal961-08.docx
SCC OnLine MP 800; Sunil Kumar vs Daljit Kaur,
2025:PHHC:092344; and Raj Kumar vs Rajender, 2025:
PHHC: 079740.
4. Having considered the submissions of the learned APP
and the learned Counsel for the appellant and the aforesaid
judgments, it is clear that a victim of an offence, including a
complainant under Section 138 of the NI Act, has the statutory
right to prefer an appeal against an order of acquittal under the
proviso to Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,
1973. The appeal, which has been pending before this Court, is
hereby transferred to the concerned Sessions Court. The
transfer is necessary to ensure that the appellant can exercise
the statutory right of appeal without being deprived of an
available forum.
5. Accordingly, the learned Registrar (Judicial) is directed to
take immediate steps to transfer the complete records of the
appeal. The concerned Sessions Court shall register the appeal
and proceed to hear and decide the matter on its own merits
and in accordance with the law. Considering the long pendency
of the matter, the Sessions Court is requested to endeavour to
dispose of the appeal expeditiously.
__________________________________________________
18 March 2026
sg 40.apeal961-08.docx
6. The appeal stands disposed of accordingly.
(R.N. Laddha, J.)
__________________________________________________
18 March 2026
