[Cites 7, Cited by 0]
Bombay High Court
Panditrao Ghodekar Nagari Sahakari ... vs Vimal Mohan Pardeshi And Anr. on 26 March, 2026
Author: R.N.Laddha
Bench: R.N.Laddha
2026:BHC-AS:14586 Digitally
signed by
CHITRA
CHITRA SANJAY
SANJAY SONAWANE
SONAWANE Date:
2026.03.26
17:48:42
+0530
Chitra Sonawane 7-CA-504-2006.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
Criminal Appeal No.504 of 2006
Panditrao Ghodekar Nagari
Age: 42 yrs,
Sahakari Patsanstha Maryadit
Nashik, 4570, Ganeshwadi
Panchavati, Nashik through
authorised representative Mr Yogesh
Madhukar Ghode, age major
Occ: service, r/o Nasik ... Appellant.
Vs.
1. Sou Vimal Mohan Pardeshi
age major, Occ : Business
r/o opp Madhuban colony
Drongagiri Society, Room no.67,
Makhamalabad Naka, Panchavati,
Nasik
2. The State of Maharashtra ... Respondents.
---
None present for the appellant.
Ms GP Mulekar, APP for the respondent / State.
---
Coram : R.N.Laddha, J.
Date : 26 March 2026.
P.C. :
The present appeal calls into question the judgment
and order dated 3 December 2005, passed by the learned
____________________________________________
26 March 2026
Chitra Sonawane 7-CA-504-2006.doc
Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Nashik, in SCC No.4712 of
2003, 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. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing
respondent No.2/ State by drawing attention of this Court
to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Celestium
Financial vs A Gnanasekaran, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1320,
submits that proviso to Section 372 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973 (CrPC), confers statutory right upon
appellant to assail the order of acquittal. He further submits
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
____________________________________________
26 March 2026
Chitra Sonawane 7-CA-504-2006.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. Having considered the submissions advanced and the
decisions cited, it is clear 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 the above, this Court deems it
appropriate to transfer the present appeal to the Court of
Sessions having jurisdiction, so as to enable the appellant to
pursue statutory remedy before the appropriate forum.
4. Accordingly, 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
decide the same on its own merits and in accordance with
____________________________________________
26 March 2026
Chitra Sonawane 7-CA-504-2006.doc
the law. Considering the long pendency of the matter, the
learned Sessions Judge is requested to dispose of the appeal
expeditiously.
5. The appeal stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
[R. N. Laddha, J.]
____________________________________________
26 March 2026
