[Cites 7, Cited by 0]
Bombay High Court
M/S. Mandlik Trading Co. vs Sunil Shivaji Yeshi And Anr. on 25 March, 2026
Author: R.N.Laddha
Bench: R.N.Laddha
Digitally
signed by
2026:BHC-AS:14233 CHITRA
CHITRA
SANJAY
SANJAY SONAWANE
SONAWANE Date:
2026.03.25
18:47:33
+0530
Chitra Sonawane 6-A-414-2007.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
Criminal Appeal No.414 of 2007
M/s Mandlik Trading Co.,
A sole proprietory concern
through Prop.Shri Sanjay Sukhdev
Mandlik
Adult, Occ: business, R/o "Sourabh"
Plot No.97/98, Venunagar, DGP
behind Phase-3, Basera Park,
Kamathwade, Nashik. ... Appellant.
Vs.
1. Mr Sunil Shivaji Yeshi, Adult,
Occ: Business, R/o N 41 CE-1-12-8,
Near Tuljabhavani temple, Shivshakti
Chowk, CIDCO, Nashik.
2. State of Maharashtra ... Respondent.
---
Mr JD Khairnar for the appellant.
Ms MR Tidke, APP for the respondent / State.
---
Coram : R.N.Laddha, J.
Date : 25 March 2026.
P.C. :
The present appeal calls into question the judgment
and order dated 23 June 2006, passed by the learned
Judicial Magistrate First Class, Nashik, in SCC
____________________________________________
25 March 2026
Chitra Sonawane 6-A-414-2007.doc
No.5987/2004, whereby respondent No.1 herein came to
be acquitted of the offence punishable under Section 138 of
the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (NI Act).
2. At the outset, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of
the appellant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor
representing respondent No.2/State, drawing attention to
the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Celestium
Financial vs A Gnanasekaran, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1320,
submitted that proviso to Section 372 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC), confers statutory right
upon appellant to assail the order of acquittal. It is further
submitted that, in order to enable effective exercise of this
right and to ensure access to proper adjudicatory forum, the
present appeal be transferred to the competent Sessions
Court. Reliance is also placed on the decisions in Kotak
Mahindra Finance Ltd Vs Nobiletto Finlease and
Investments, Criminal Appeal No.645 of 2006 dated 31
October 2025, Delhi High Court; Pooja Trading Compnay
v/s Harishchandra Manjrekar, Criminal Appeal No.1016 of
2006 daed 13 October 2025, Bombay High Court;
Shivputra Arwat vs Sangappa Bhasgikar, Criminal Appeal
No.1051 of 2008 dated 8 October 2025, Bombay High
____________________________________________
25 March 2026
Chitra Sonawane 6-A-414-2007.doc
Court; Salimshah Haji Shakrushan vs Syd Javdali Syd
Anwarali, Criminal Appeal No.167 of 2006 dated 15
October 2025, Bombay High Court at Aurangabad; Pankaj
Mehta vs Vishal Hundar, 2026 SCC OnLine MP 800; Sunil
Kumar vs Daljit Kaur, 2025:PHHC:092344; and Raj Kumar
vs Rajender, 2025:PHHC:079740 to submit that there is no
impediment in transferring the appeal to the concerned
Sessions Court.
3. Considering the submissions advanced and the
decisions cited above, it appears that the victim including
the complainant in proceedings u/s 138 of the NI Act, is
entitled to invoke the proviso to Section 372 of CrPC to
challenge an acquittal. In light of this, it is considered
appropriate that the present appeal be transferred to the
Court of Sessions having jurisdiction, so as to enable the
appellant to pursue statutory remedy before the proper
forum.
4. Accordignly, the learned Registrar (Judicial) is directed
to take necessary steps for prompt transmission of the
entire record to the concerned Sessions Court. Upon
receipt, the Sessions Court shall register the appeal and
____________________________________________
25 March 2026
Chitra Sonawane 6-A-414-2007.doc
decide the same on its own merits and in accordance with
the law. Considering the long pendency of the matter, the
learned Sessions Judge is requested to dispose of the appeal
expeditiously. The appeal stands disposed of in above terms.
[R. N. Laddha, J.]
____________________________________________
25 March 2026
