Gujarat High Court
Tulsi Dye Chem Private Limited Thro ... vs State Of Gujarat on 19 February, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/3617/2025 ORDER DATED: 19/02/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL) NO. 3617 of
2025
In F/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 6683 of 2025
==========================================================
TULSI DYE CHEM PRIVATE LIMITED THRO MAHENDRA MANILAL PATEL
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
AKSH S GANDHI(9402) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS. JIRGA JHAVERI, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE S.V. PINTO
Date : 19/02/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. The present application is filed by the applicant - original
complainant under Section 419(4) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha
Sanhita, 2023 seeking leave to appeal against the order dated 12.12.2024
passed by the learned 38th Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Ahmedabad (hereinafter referred to as the Trial Court) acquitting the
respondent - accused in Criminal Case No. 59350 of 2022 filed by the
applicant for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument
Act, 1881. (hereinafter referred to as the NI Act)
1.1 The respondent is hereinafter referred to as " the accused" as he
stood in the original case for the sake of convenience, clarity and brevity.
2. The brief facts culled out from the memo of the present appeal as
well as the record and proceedings are as under:-
2.1 The Respondent No.2 (Original Accused No.1) is a proprietorship
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/3617/2025 ORDER DATED: 19/02/2025
undefined
concern of Respondent No.3 (Original Accused No.2) and is engaged in
the business of supplying chemicals. Respondent No.3 had contacted the
Applicant and purchased various materials, which were sold by the
Applicant on an agreed credit period, with invoices raised accordingly.
The goods were accepted by Respondent No.3 without any dispute or
demur. The Applicant also issued invoices for interest on delayed
payment, which were accepted by Respondent Nos.2 and 3. Respondent
Nos.2 and 3 made ad-hoc payments against the invoices raised by the
Applicant. The Applicant maintains and regularly updates a ledger
recording these transactions. Upon dishonor of the aforementioned
cheques, the Applicant, through his Advocate, issued statutory Notices
dated 09.04.2022 to the last known address of Respondent Nos.2 and 3
under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, demanding
payment of Rs.31,71,255/- within the statutory period of 15 days from the
date of receipt of such notice. That the accused did not reply the notice
nor made the payment and hence complaint was filed by the complaint in
the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ahmedabad under Section 138
of the N.I.Act., which was registered as Criminal Case No. 59350 of
2022.
2.2 The accused were duly served with the summons and the accused
appeared and the plea of the accused was recorded and the evidence of
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/3617/2025 ORDER DATED: 19/02/2025
undefined
the applicant was taken on record. After the evidence of the applicant was
closed, the further statement of the accused under Section 313 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was recorded and after hearing the
arguments of both the learned advocates, the learned Magistrate,
Ahmedabad was pleased to acquit the accused for the offence of under
Section 138 of the N.I.Act.
3. Heard learned advocate Mr. Aksh Gandhi for the applicant and
learned Additional Public Prosecutor Ms. Jirga Jhaveri, for the respondent
State. Though served to the respondent-accused, none has appeared either
in person or through an advocate. Perused the judgment and order passed
by the learned trial Court as well as the judgment and order passed by the
learned Sessions Court.
4. Learned advocate Mr. Aksh Gandhi submits that the applicant has
produced the copy of the ledger, which proves that the amount of cheque
of Rs.31,71,255/- was outstanding, towards which, the accused had
issued two cheques bearing Cheques No. 001337 and 01338 for an
amount of Rs.13,71,255/- and Rs.18,00,000/- respectively and the
applicant had produced the documentary evidence to show that the parties
have business transaction since the year 2017. The learned trial Court has
not believed the document and not appreciated the documents in proper
perspective merely as the applicant has not produced the certificate under
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/3617/2025 ORDER DATED: 19/02/2025
undefined
Section 65(b) of the Evidence Act, but the learned trial Court has relied
on the same document and has concluded that the amounts were different.
5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Ms. Jirga Jhaveri for the
respondent-State has submitted that learned trial Court and the learned
Sessions Judge has appreciated all the evidence in a different manner and
the issue requires consideration and hence appropriate orders may be
passed.
6. On perusal of the impugned judgment and order and the paper
book produced by the applicant on record, it, prima facie, appears that the
learned trial Court has not appreciated the documents in proper
perspective and hence, leave to appeal is required to be granted and the
same is granted.
(S. V. PINTO,J)
VVM
