Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 841 Guj
Judgement Date : 31 January, 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/1660/2024 ORDER DATED: 31/01/2024
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL) NO. 1660 of
2024
In
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 258 of 2024
With
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 258 of 2024
==========================================================
KAMLA TRADERS PROPRIETOR KAILASHKUMAR GIRDHARILAL SHAH
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. JAY M THAKKAR(6677) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS. M.H.BHATT, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M. K. THAKKER
Date : 31/01/2024
ORAL ORDER
Order in Criminal Misc. Application:-
1. This is an application by the applicant - original complainant under Section 378(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, seeking leave of this Court to present an appeal against the judgment and order of acquittal, passed by the learned 2 nd Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Anand dated 14.7.2023 in Criminal Case No. 2897 of 2018.
2. Learned advocate Mr. Jay M. Thakkar for the applicant draws the attention of the Court with regard to observation made by the learned trial Court wherein, the learned trial Court comes to the conclusion that as complainant fails to produce the delivery challan
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/1660/2024 ORDER DATED: 31/01/2024
undefined
showing that the goods is received by the respondent - accused, the respondent was acquitted from the charges. Learned advocate draws the attention of this Court with regard to the Exhibit-28 i.e. the reply to the demand notice. On perusing the said reply, there was no any defence which was raised by the respondent - accused with regard to the non receiving of the goods, only defence which was raised is that the cheque which was given towards the security was misused by the complainant. Learned advocate submits that signature on the cheque was not disputed by the respondent - accused neither the transaction was disputed. However, bare defence which was accepted by the learned trial Court without creating any circumstances, would not absolve the respondent-accused from the liability. Learned advocate submits that though the bills were produced below Exhibit-73 to 95 and the same was prove through the evidence of the complainant.
The same was discarded and judgment and order of acquittal was passed. Learned advocate submits that in the reply to the demand notice, stand was taken that amount of the bills were already paid in cash or through the account payee cheques from the Account of brother namely Kamlesh R. Parikh. However, no such defence was proved through examining the said Kamlesh Parikh nor through the bank's statement of the brother though not a single question was put during the cross-examination on the complainant which suggest the probable defence of the respondent - accused, judgment and order of acquittal was passed.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/1660/2024 ORDER DATED: 31/01/2024
undefined
3. In view of the above submissions, this Court finds that there is some arguable case, and therefore, leave to appeal is granted. Hence, application to prefer appeal is allowed
Order in Criminal Appeal:-
Appeal is admitted. Learned advocate Ms. Dixa U. Pandya for learned advocate Mr. Hiren S. Somaiya waives service of notice of admission on behalf of the respondent - accused.
Let Record and Proceedings be called for.
Matter be listed in seriatim.
(M. K. THAKKER,J) BEENA SHAH
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!