Gujarat High Court
Manishbhai Shethvala (Manishbhai ... vs State Of Gujarat on 11 July, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/1785/2025 ORDER DATED: 11/07/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL) NO. 1785 of
2025
In F/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 49487 of 2024
==========================================================
MANISHBHAI SHETHVALA (MANISHBHAI JAGDISHCHANDRA
SHETHVALA)
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR P P MAJMUDAR(5284) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
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. 5713 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
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/1785/2025 ORDER DATED: 11/07/2025
undefined
for the applicant.
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.
"090391" dated 14.12.2010 for Rs.18,75,000/- from his account with The
Surat Peoples Co.Op.Bank Ltd., Katar Branch, Surat. 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 "Exceeds arrangement not arranged for". 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 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. 5713 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
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/1785/2025 ORDER DATED: 11/07/2025
undefined
submits that if the reply to the notice sent by the respondent No. 2 is
perused, it clearly admits that the financial transaction had taken place
between theparties and there was no explanation regarding the cheque
that was given to the applicant. Moreover, during the cross examination
presumption was not rebutted by the responedent No. 2. Leared 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.23,25,000/- 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
the applicant as also on perusal of the impugned order and the paper book
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/1785/2025 ORDER DATED: 11/07/2025
undefined
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
