Gujarat High Court
Gujarat State Co-Op. Agriculture And ... vs State Of Gujarat on 3 July, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/7784/2025 ORDER DATED: 03/07/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION (FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL) NO. 7784
of 2025
In F/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 5793 of 2025
==========================================================
GUJARAT STATE CO-OP. AGRICULTURE AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT
BANK LTD THRO RATANSINH CHANDANSINH VAGHELA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR.AMIT R JOSHI(6682) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS.C.M.SHAH, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE S.V. PINTO
Date : 03/07/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. The present application is filed by the applicant -
original complainant seeking leave to file an appeal against the
order dated 27.11.2024 passed by the learned 2nd Additional Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Surendranagar (hereinafter referred to as the
"learned Trial Court") in Criminal Case No. 1549 of 2018, whereby,
respondent No.2 - original accused came to be acquitted from the
charge levelled against them under Section 138 of Negotiable
Instrument Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as "N.I.Act").
2. Heard learned advocate Mr.Amit Joshi for the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/7784/2025 ORDER DATED: 03/07/2025
undefined
applicant and learned APP Ms.C.M.Shah for the respondent No.1
- State.
3. Learned advocate Mr.Amit Joshi for the applicant
submits that the applicant is in the business of advancing the loan
and the respondent no.2 had taken loan Rs.1,00,000/-, but did not
repay the loan, and at the end of tenure, the outstanding amount
was Rs.3,37,376/-, towards which, the respondent no.2 issued
cheque no.291451 dated 18.07.2018 from his account with The
Surendranagar Cooperative Bank, Chotila Branch. The applicant
deposited the said cheque in his account with The Surendranagar
District Cooperative Bank Ltd., 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 repay the amount within 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 came
to be registered as Criminal Case No. 1549 of 2018. After the
respondent no.2 was duly served with the summons, he appeared
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/7784/2025 ORDER DATED: 03/07/2025
undefined
before the learned Trial Court and his plea was recorded at Exh.9
and thereafter, applicant stepped into the witness box and
produced 11 documentary evidence in support of the case. The
applicant produced the Loan Agreement Form at Exh.17, the
Mortgage Deed at Exh.18, the Undertaking executed by the
respondent no. 2 at Exh.19, Statement of Accounts at Exh. 15 and
proved that the amount was the legally enforceable due amount.
During the proceedings, talks of compromise were going on
between the parties and in the loan ledger, the amount of
Rs.2500/- is also deposited in the account of respondent no. 2.
Learned advocate submits that the question of limitation did not
rise as it was an acknowledgment of debt, but the learned Trial
Court, without considering the oral and documentary evidence in
proper perspective, has concluded that the cheque was issued for
time barred and by the impugned judgment and order, was
pleased to acquit the respondent no.2 from the offence. Learned
advocate submits that the applicant has a good case on merits, and
hence, has urged this Court to allow the present application.
4. Learned APP Ms.C.M.Shah for the respondent -State
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/7784/2025 ORDER DATED: 03/07/2025
undefined
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 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
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
