Gujarat High Court
Shriram Finance Ltd. Through Abhay G. ... vs State Of Gujarat on 22 April, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/21444/2024 ORDER DATED: 22/04/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION NO. 21444 of 2024
(FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL)
In
F/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 26151 of 2024
=============================================
SHRIRAM FINANCE LTD. THROUGH ABHAY G. NAYAK
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
=============================================
Appearance:
MR MANISH J PATEL(2131) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS JIRGA JHAVERI, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
=============================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE S.V. PINTO
Date : 22/04/2025
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 27.02.2024 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Surat (hereinafter referred to as the "learned Trial
Court") in Criminal Case No. 6759 of 2019, 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/21444/2024 ORDER DATED: 22/04/2025
undefined
2. Heard learned advocate Mr.Manish J. Patel for the
applicant and learned APP Ms. Jirga Jhaveri for the respondent -
State.
3. Learned advocate Mr.Manish J. Patel for the applicant
submits that the applicant is doing business of finance and the
respondent No.2 had taken loan of Rs.9,00,000/- and also had
taken loan of Rs.2,25,049/- against the vehicle No.GJ-05-AV-8355
and towards the outstanding amount, the respondent No.2 issued
cheque No.815932 dated 03.12.2018 for Rs.3,84,066/- from her
account with Indian Bank, Sachin Branch, Surat. The cheque was
deposited by the applicant in their account with Axis Bank, Surat
Banch, but the cheque returned unpaid with the endorsement
"Funds Insufficient". The demand statutory notice was given
which was duly served to the respondent No.2, but the amount
was not paid, and hence, the applicant filed the complaint under
Section 138 of N.I.Act before the Court of learned Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Surat, which came to be registered as Criminal Case
No.6759 of 2019. The respondent No.2 was duly served with the
summons and after she appeared, the entire evidence of the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/21444/2024 ORDER DATED: 22/04/2025
undefined
applicant was taken on record. After the evidence of the applicant
was closed, the further statement under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C.
of the respondent No.2 was recorded. The respondent No.2
stepped into the witness box and deposed at Exh.23 and also
produced 14 documentary evidence in support of the case. After
the arguments of both the learned advocates for the respective
parties, learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Surat was
pleased to pass the impugned judgment and acquit the respondent
No.2 from the offence under Section 138 of the N.I.Act. Learned
advocate for the applicant submits that the applicant had
produced all the documentary evidence and had proved that the
loan was taken and in the affidavit of examination-in-chief, the
respondent No.2 has admitted that the loan was taken and the
same has not been paid up by her. Learned advocate for the
applicant has taken this Court through the evidence of the
respondent No.2 before the learned Trial Court. Learned advocate
for the applicant submits that the learned Trial Court has
completely misread the evidence, and particularly, the admission
made by the respondent No.2 and hence, the application for leave
to appeal may be granted.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/21444/2024 ORDER DATED: 22/04/2025
undefined
4. Lear\ned 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 as also on going through the deposition of the
respondent No.2, prima facie, it appears that learned Trial Court
has failed to appreciate the entire evidence in proper perspective,
and hence, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case 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
