Gujarat High Court
Shriram Finance Ltd Thro Kuldeepsinh ... vs State Of Gujarat on 1 July, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/15793/2024 ORDER DATED: 01/07/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION NO.15793 of 2024
(FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL)
In
F/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 29273 of 2024
================================================================
SHRIRAM FINANCE LTD THRO KULDEEPSINH NIRMLSINH ZALA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
================================================================
Appearance:
MR MANISH J PATEL(2131) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS NAMRATA R MULCHANDANI(9956) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR. VANRAJSINH M DAMORE(3787) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR PRANAV DHAGAT, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
SIDDHARTH Y KASHYAP(8001) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
================================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE S.V. PINTO
Date : 01/07/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. The present application is filed by the applicant -
original complainant seeking leave to file an appeal against the
order dated 20.06.2024 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate,
First Class, Surendranagar (hereinafter referred to as 'the learned
Trial Court') in Criminal Case No. 1045 of 2018, whereby, the
respondent no. 2 - original accused came to be acquitted from the
charge levelled against them under Section 138 of Negotiable
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/15793/2024 ORDER DATED: 01/07/2025
undefined
Instrument Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as "N.I.Act").
2. Learned advocate Ms. Namrata Mulchandani for the
applicant submits that the applicant is the financial company and
the respondent no. 2 had advanced a loan of Rs.3,50,000/- which
was to be paid in equal monthly installments. The respondent
no.2 paid some installments, but thereafter, did not pay the
remaining amount. When the account was settled, an amount of
Rs.10,65,000/- was outstanding, towards which, the respondent
no. 2 issued cheque No.017326 dated 09.04.2018 from his account
with Saurashtra Gramin Bank, Chotila. The applicant deposited
the said cheque in its account with Axis Bank, Surendranagar
Branch, 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
respondent no. 2 did not give the reply to the notice and did not
repay the amount within the stipulated time, and hence, the
applicant filed the complaint under Section 138 of N.I.Act before
the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Surendranagar, which
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/15793/2024 ORDER DATED: 01/07/2025
undefined
came to be registered as Criminal Case No. 1045 of 2018. After the
respondent no.2 was duly served with the summons, he
appeared before the learned Trial Court and his plea was
recorded and the applicant produced documentary evidence
including Loan-cum-Hypothecation Agreement at Exh.18 and
statement of accounts of the respondent no. 2 at Exh.8. The
applicant stepped into the witness box and has examined one
witness on his behalf. After the closing pursis was filed, the
further statement of the respondent no.2 was recorded but the
respondent no. 2 did not step into the witness box and did not
examine any witnesses on his behalf, but the learned Trial Court,
by the impugned judgment and order, was pleased to acquit the
respondent no.2 mainly on the ground that the debt was time
barred. Learned advocate for the applicant submits that the
learned Trial Court has considered the date, on which the amount
was advanced, but, in fact, the amount was to be repaid in
monthly installment and the last installment was due on
20.01.2015. Learned advocate submits that the applicant has a
good case on merits and the debt is within the period of
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/15793/2024 ORDER DATED: 01/07/2025
undefined
limitation but the learned Trial Court has not appreciated the
documents in proper perspective and has urged this Court to
allow the present application.
3. Learned APP Mr. Pranav Dhagat 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.
4. When the matter was called out, learned advocate Mr.
Vanrajsinh Damore for the respondent no. 2 is not present and no
submissions for the respondent no. 2 were made on his behalf.
5. Considering the submissions of learned advocate for
the applicant as also perusal of the paper book available on record,
prima facie, it appears that 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
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/15793/2024 ORDER DATED: 01/07/2025
undefined
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
