Gujarat High Court
Mahesh Lakhubhai Maru vs State Of Gujarat on 3 July, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/8424/2025 ORDER DATED: 03/07/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL) NO. 8424 of
2025
In F/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 15219 of 2025
==========================================================
MAHESH LAKHUBHAI MARU
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR YASH V GUPTA(11814) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
VISHAL K ANANDJIWALA(7798) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS CM 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 07.03.2025 passed by the learned 4 th Additional Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Porbandar (hereinafter referred to as the
"learned Trial Court") in Criminal Case No. 5682 of 2022, whereby,
respondent No.2 - original accused came to be acquitted from the
offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881
(hereinafter referred to as "N.I.Act").
2. Heard learned advocate Mr.Yash Gupta for the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/8424/2025 ORDER DATED: 03/07/2025
undefined
applicant and learned APP Ms.C.M.Shah for the respondent No.1
- State.
3. Learned advocate Mr.Yash Gupta for the applicant
submits that the applicant and the respondent no. 2 were known to
each other and were in the same business of fisheries. The
respondent no. 2 was in need for money and on his request, the
applicant had advanced an amount of Rs.4,00,000/- on 27.06.2022
as hand loan to the respondent no. 2 and notarized document on a
non-judicial stamp paper of Rs.300/- was executed between the
parties, wherein, the amount was admitted to be given by the
applicant and the respondent no. 2 had issued cheque no.250851
dated 27.07.2022 for Rs.4,00,000/- from his account with Canara
Bank. The applicant deposited the said cheque in his account with
Bank of Baroda, M.G.Road, Porbandar 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 and the respondent no. 2 gave an evasive reply
and did not repay the amount within stipulated time, and hence,
the applicant filed the complaint under Section 138 of N.I.Act
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/8424/2025 ORDER DATED: 03/07/2025
undefined
before the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Porbandar, which
came to be registered as Criminal Case No. 5682 of 2022. After the
respondent no.2 was duly served with the summons, he appeared
before the learned Trial Court and his plea was recorded at Exh.8,
and thereafter, the applicant stepped into the witness box and
examined one witness and produced 8 documentary evidences in
support of the case. Learned advocate submits that the applicant
produced the agreement between the parties at Exh. 31 and also
the reply filed by the respondent no. 2 at Exh.15 but the learned
Trial Court, without considering the oral and documentary
evidence in proper perspective, has concluded that the applicant
did not have the financial capacity to advance the amount to the
respondent no. 2 and even though the agreement was on record
did not appreciate the same and by the impugned judgment and
order, was pleased to acquit the respondent no.2 from the offence
under Section 138 of the N.I.Act. Learned advocate further
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/8424/2025 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
