Gujarat High Court
Bansilal Chhaganlal Shah Prop. Of ... vs Hiteshkumar Hasmukhlal Mistri on 15 April, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/6578/2025 ORDER DATED: 15/04/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO.6578 of 2025
(FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL)
In
F/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 12010 of 2025
=============================================
BANSILAL CHHAGANLAL SHAH PROP. OF VARDHAMAN
FINANCE THRO POA MAYUR BANSILAL SHAH
Versus
HITESHKUMAR HASMUKHLAL MISTRI & ANR.
=============================================
Appearance:
MS AMRITA AJMERA(5204) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS JIRGA JHAVERI, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 2
=============================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE S.V. PINTO
Date : 15/04/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. The present application is filed by the applicant -
original complainant under Section 378(4) of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973 seeking leave to file an appeal against the order
dated 20.01.2025 passed by the learned Additional Judicial
Magistrate, First Class, Navsari (hereinafter referred to as the
"learned Trial Court") in Criminal Case No. 896/2022, whereby,
the learned Trial Court was pleased to acquit the accused from the
offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881
(hereinafter referred to "the N.I. Act" for short).
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/6578/2025 ORDER DATED: 15/04/2025
undefined
2. Heard learned advocate Ms.Amrita Ajmera for the
applicant and learned APP Ms. Jirga Jhaveri for the respondent
No.2 - State.
3. Learned advocate Ms. Amrita Ajmera for the applicant
submits that the applicant was doing the business of finance in the
name and style of Vardhman Finance and as the respondent no.1
was in need of money, he approached the applicant and the
applicant gave an amount of Rs.4,50,000/- by cheque No.000070
dated 23.06.216 from his account with HDFC Bank, Navsari branch
and an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- by cheque No.000081 dated
19.06.2019 from his account with Bank of India, Navsari Branch to
the respondent no.1. The respondent No.1 was paying interest on
the amount loaned regularly and the necessary promissory notes
and other documents were also executed. Towards the above
referred amount, the respondent No.1 gave cheque No.053847 for
an amount of Rs.4,50,000/- and cheque No.053848 for an amount
of Rs.3,82,700/- both from his account with the Bank of India,
Lunsikui Navsari Branch. The cheques were deposited by the
applicant in his account, but both the cheques returned unpaid
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/6578/2025 ORDER DATED: 15/04/2025
undefined
with the endorsement "Funds Insufficient". The demand statutory
notice was given which was duly served to the respondent No.1
but the amount was not paid, and hence, the applicant filed the
complaint under Section 138 of N.I.Act before the Court of Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Navsari, which came to be registered as
Criminal Case No. 896/2022. The respondent No1 was duly served
and during trial, the applicant has produced his examination-in-
chief and 23 documentary evidences in support of his case.
Learned advocate for the applicant submits that during the period
from 2016 to 2021, the respondent No.1 has paid the amount of
interest and had also paid an amount of Rs.94,500/- by cheque
No.116573 dated 20.06.2019 and had also executed a promissory
note and has admitted the transactions between them but the
learned Trial Court did not appreciate the evidence properly and
has concluded that the debt was a time barred debt and by the
impugned judgment and order was pleased to acquit the
respondent No.1 from the offence under Section 138 of the N.I.Act.
Learned advocate submits that the applicant has a good case on
merits, and hence, the application for leave to appeal may be
granted.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/6578/2025 ORDER DATED: 15/04/2025
undefined
4. Learned APP Ms. Jirga Jhaveri for the respondent State
has submitted that the learned Trial Court has considered all the
documents produced by the applicant and has also considered the
evidence and has passed the impugned order of acquittal
considering the settled principles of law and hence, the leave to
appeal may not be granted.
5. Considering the submissions of learned advocate for
the applicant as also the paper book on record and the impugned
judgment and order, prima facie, it appears that the applicant has
produced all the necessary documents as evidence in support of
his case but the learned Trial Court has failed to appreciate the
entire evidence in proper perspective, and hence, in the peculiar
facts and circumstances of the case and in the considered opinion
of this Court, the application deserves to be considered.
Consequently, the application for leave to appeal is granted and
disposed off accordingly.
(S. V. PINTO,J)
F.S.KAZI
