Gujarat High Court
Manishbhai Jagdishchandra Shethwala ... vs State Of Gujarat on 11 July, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/1769/2025 ORDER DATED: 11/07/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL) NO. 1769 of
2025
In F/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 49490 of 2024
==========================================================
MANISHBHAI JAGDISHCHANDRA SHETHWALA LH OF ASHABEN
JAGDISHCHANDRA SHETHVALA & ORS.
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR P P MAJMUDAR(5284) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3
MR. PRANAV DHAGAT, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE S.V. PINTO
Date : 11/07/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. The present application is filed by the applicant - original
complainant seeking leave to appeal against the order dated 05.10.2024
passed by the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Surat
(hereinafter referred to as the learned trial Court) acquitting the
respondent - No. 2 in Criminal Case No. 5714 of 2011 filed by the
applicant for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument
Act, 1881. (hereinafter referred to as the NI Act).
2. Heard learned advocate Mr. P.P.Majmudar for the applicant and
learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. Pranav Dhagat for the
respondent - State. Perused the judgment and order passed by the learned
trial Court as well as the paper book submitted by the learned advocate
for the applicant.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/1769/2025 ORDER DATED: 11/07/2025
undefined
3. Learned advocate Mr. P.P.Majmudar appearing for the applicant
submits that the respondent No. 2 was in need of some finance and the
applicant had advanced some amount to the respondent No. 2 and when
the amount was demanded, the respondent No. 2 gave cheque No.
"391528" dated 14.12.2010 for Rs.17,50,000/- from his account with The
Surat National Cooperative Bank Ltd., Karwa Road, Navapura, Surat
Banch. The said cheque was deposited by the applicant in his account
with The Surat Mercantile Co.Op.Bankt Ltd, Anandmahal Road Branch,
Surat but the cheque returned unpaid with the endorsement "Funds
Insufficient and Signature Differs". The demand statutory notice was
given, which was duly served to the respondent No. 2 but the respondent
No. 2 gave an evasive reply, wherein, he acknowledge the financial
transaction between the parties but did not make any payment within the
stipulated period and hence, the applicant filed a complaint under Section
138 of the NI Act before the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Surat,
which came to be registered as Criminal Case No. 5714 of 2011. After
the summons were duly served, the respondent No. 2 appeared and his
plea was recorded and the applicant produced oral and documentary
evidence in support of his case. The applicant step into the witness box
and produced documentary evidence in support of his case. Learned
advocate for the applicant submits that if the reply to the notice sent by
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/1769/2025 ORDER DATED: 11/07/2025
undefined
the respondent No. 2 is perused, it clearly admits that the financial
transaction had taken place between the parties and there was no
explanation regarding thecheque that was given to the applicant.
Moreover, during the cross examination, the presumption was not
rebutted by the responedent No. 2. Learned advocate further submits that
the applicant produced his Income Tax Returns for the Assessment Years
2011-12, 2012-13, 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 and 2015-16, which
clearly show that the outstanding amount of Rs.24,50,000/- was due from
the respondent No. 2. Learned advocate for the applicant submits that the
documentary evidence clearly proves that the legally enforceable debt
amount was due to the applicant but the learned trial Court did not
appreciate the documentary evidence in proper perspective and has
passed the impugned judgment and order of acquittal and hence, the
application seeking leave to appeal must be granted.
4. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Mr. Pranav Dhagat
appearing for the respondent No. 1 - State has submitted that learned trial
Court has considered all the oral and documentary evidence in proper
perspective and no interference is required in the impugned order and
hence the application seeking leave to appeal must be rejected.
5. Considering the submissions advanced by the learned advocate for
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/1769/2025 ORDER DATED: 11/07/2025
undefined
the applicant as also on perusal of the impugned order and the paper book
submitted by the learned advocate for the applicant, prima-facie, it
appears that the learned trial Court has not appreciated the documents in
proper perspective and hence, the application seeking leave to appeal
deserves consideration and the same is granted.
(S. V. PINTO,J)
VVM
