Gujarat High Court
Sunil Prakash Murjani vs State Of Gujarat on 15 July, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/12065/2025 ORDER DATED: 15/07/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION NO. 12065 of 2025
(FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL)
In
F/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 20885 of 2025
==========================================================
SUNIL PRAKASH MURJANI
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR KIRTIDEV R DAVE(3267) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR PRANAV DHAGAT, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE S.V. PINTO
Date : 15/07/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. The present application is filed by the applicant -
original complainant seeking leave to file an appeal against the
order passed by the Additional Judicial Magistrate, First Class,
Mundra, (hereinafter referred to as the "learned Trial Court") in
Criminal Case No. 392 of 2022 on 01.03.2025, whereby, the
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.Kirtidev Dave for the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/12065/2025 ORDER DATED: 15/07/2025
undefined
applicant and learned APP Mr. Pranav Dhagat for the respondent
No.1 - State.
3. Learned advocate Mr.Kirtidev Dave for the applicant
submits that the applicant and the respondent no. 2 were known to
each other and were friends and the respondent no. 2 was in need
for finance, and on his request, the applicant had advanced an
amount of Rs.6,00,000/- and the deed regarding the amount was
executed between the parties on a Non-Judicial Stamp of Rs.300/- .
The respondent no.2 issued cheque no. 626858 for the amount of
Rs.6,00,000/- from his account with Dena Bank, Gundala Branch,
(now Bank of Baroda) towards the outstanding amount. The
applicant deposited the said cheque in his account with Axis Bank,
but the cheque returned unpaid with the endorsement "CHI ITEM
REJECT FAILED AT-PART VALIDATION". The demand
statutory notice was given, which was duly served to the
respondent no. 2 but the respondent no. 2 gave a reply taking the
defence that the cheque was lost and same was misused by the
applicant. The amount was not repaid within the stipulated time,
and hence, the applicant filed a complaint under Section 138 of
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/12065/2025 ORDER DATED: 15/07/2025
undefined
N.I.Act before the Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class,
Mundra, which came to be registered as Criminal Case No. 392 of
2022. After the respondent no.2 was duly served with the
summons, he appeared before the learned Trial Court and the
entire evidence of the applicant was taken on record. In the cross-
examination, the respondent no. 2 did not rebut the presumption
and to prove the case that the cheque was lost and misused by the
applicant, the respondent no. 2 did not produce any oral or
documentary evidence. The learned Trial Court did not appreciate
the evidence in proper perspective and on the ground that the
deed executed between the parties was executed prior to filing the
case but the same was not mentioned in the complaint and there
was no legally enforceable due amount proved and was pleased to
pass the impugned judgment and order of acquittal. Learned
advocate submits that besides the deed, there was evidence on
record that the amount was advanced to the respondent no. 2,
towards which, the cheque in question was issued but the learned
Trial Court did not appreciate that the defence raised by the
respondent no. 2 was not sufficient to rebut the presumption in
favour of the applicant. Learned advocate further submits that the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/12065/2025 ORDER DATED: 15/07/2025
undefined
applicant has a good case on merits and has urged this Court to
allow the present application.
4. Learned APP Mr. Pranav Dhagat for the respondent -
State has submitted that the learned Trial Court has considered the
evidence on record and has passed the impugned judgment and
order 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 on perusal of the paper book produced by the
learned advocate for the applicant, prima-facie, it appears that the
learned Trial Court has failed to appreciate the evidence on record
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
