Gujarat High Court
Tripoli Management Pvt. Ltd. Through ... vs State Of Gujarat on 4 August, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/3501/2024 ORDER DATED: 04/08/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL) NO. 3501 of
2024
In F/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 3429 of 2024
With
F/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 3429 of 2024
==========================================================
TRIPOLI MANAGEMENT PVT. LTD. THROUGH JIGNESH PRAFFULBHAI
THAKAR
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR KISHAN N BRAHMBHATT(11382) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR ABID R. PATHAN for MR VIRAL M PANDYA(5257) for the Respondent(s)
No. 2,3
MR ROHAN N. SHAH, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE S.V. PINTO
Date : 04/08/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. The present application is filed by the applicant -
original complainant seeking leave to file an appeal against
the judgment and order of Acquittal dated 25.08.2023 passed
by the Special Negotiable Instruments Act Court, Ghee
Kanta, Ahmedabad (hereinafter referred to as the "learned
Trial Court") in Criminal Case No. 164158/2021, whereby, the
learned Trial Court was pleased to acquit the respondent
Nos. 2 and 3 from the offence under Section 138 of
Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as
"the NI Act" for short).
2. Heard learned advocate Mr. Kishan N. Brahmbhatt for
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/3501/2024 ORDER DATED: 04/08/2025
undefined
the applicant, Mr. Abid R. Pathan, learned advocate for Mr.
Viral M, Pandya, learned advocate for the respondents No.2
& 3 and learned APP Mr. Rohan N. Shah for the respondent
- State.
3. Learned advocate Mr. Kishan N. Brahmbhatt for the
applicant submits that the respondent nos. 2 and 3 had
taken an amount of Rs.11,19,525/- from the applicant
Company and an amount of Rs. 7,47,587/- was outstanding
and a recall notice dated 23.09.2021 was given to the
respondent Nos.1, 2 and 3. The respondent No.2 had issued a
cheque No. 000036 dated 12.10.2021 for Rs.7,47,589/- from his
account with The Karnavati Co-operative Bank Ltd. and the
cheque was deposited by the applicant in their account but
the same was returned unpaid with the endorsement "Fund
Insufficient". The demand statutory notice was given but no
reply was filed and the amount was not paid within the
stipulated period and hence the applicant filed a criminal
complaint u/s. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act before
the Court of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Ahmedabad,
which came to be registered as Criminal Case No.
164158/2021. The learned Trial Court was pleased to take
cognizance and issue summons to the respondent Nos.2 and 3
and the respondent Nos.2 and 3 appeared and the plea was
recorded and thereafter the applicant stepped into the witness
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/3501/2024 ORDER DATED: 04/08/2025
undefined
box and filed the affidavit of examination-in-chief at Exh.-4
and produced 14 documentary evidences in support of his
case. After the closing pursis was filed by the learned
advocate for the applicant, during the further statement
recorded under section 313 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, the respondents Nos.2 and 3 mainly took a
defense that the authority letter did not give the authority
to file the complaint and the loan was taken and did not
remember the promissory note and did not execute it. After
the arguments of the learned parties were heard, the learned
trial Court by the impugned judgment and order was pleased
to acquit the respondents No.2 and 3 from the offence under
section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act mainly on the
ground that the cheque was more than the amount of the
dues outstanding and the same was not proved by the
applicant and that the cheque was not issued legally and in
a proper prospective. Learned advocate submits that from the
oral and documentary evidences, the applicant had proved the
case beyond the reasonable doubts and that the cheque was
issued legally but the trial Court has not considered the
same. Learned advocate also submits that the loan statement
is produced on record at Exh.14 and the facility agreement
at Exh.13 and also the application for loan at Exh.10 and
the loan sanction letter at Exh.11 but the same were not
considered in proper prospective by the learned Trial Court
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/3501/2024 ORDER DATED: 04/08/2025
undefined
and the impugned order came to be passed. The applicant
has a good case on merits and hence the application seeking
leave to appeal is required to be allowed.
4. Learned advocate Mr. Abid R. Pathan for Mr. Viral M,
Pandya, learned advocate for the respondents No.2 & 3 and
learned APP Mr. Rohan N. Shah jointly submitted that the
learned trial Court has considered the documentary evidence
in proper perspective and has passed impugned judgment and
order of acquittal and hence the leave to appeal is not
required to be granted.
5. Considering the submissions of learned advocate for the
applicant as also on perusal of the paper book on record and
the judgment and order of acquittal, prima facie, it appears
that the documents have not been properly appreciated in
proper perspective. 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 seeking leave to appeal is granted and disposed
off accordingly.
(S. V. PINTO,J)
MAYA
