Gujarat High Court
Patel Bharatbhai Manilal vs State Of Gujarat on 11 September, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/18433/2025 ORDER DATED: 11/09/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL) NO. 18433
of 2025
In F/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 33898 of 2025
==========================================================
PATEL BHARATBHAI MANILAL
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR BJ PRIYADARSHI(6016) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS. CHETNA SHAH, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE S.V. PINTO
Date : 11/09/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. The present application is filed by the applicant - original
complainant under Section 419(4) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha
Sanhita, 2023 (for short "B.N.S.S.") seeking leave to file an appeal
against the order dated 30-07-2025 passed by the learned Additional
Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vijapur (hereinafter referred to as the "learned
Trial Court") in Criminal Case No. 520 of 2024, whereby the learned
Trial Court has dismissed the Criminal Case and the respondent No. 2
and 3 - original accused came to be acquitted from the offence under
Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred
to as 'the NI Act").
2. Heard learned advocate Mr. B.J.Priyadarshi appearing for the
applicant and learned APP Ms. Chetna Shah for the respondent No. 1 -
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/18433/2025 ORDER DATED: 11/09/2025
undefined
State. Perused the impugned judgment and order and paper book filed by
the learned advocate for the applicant.
3. Learned advocate Mr. B.J. Priyadarshi for the applicant submits the
respondent No. 3 is the administrator of the respondent No. 2 firm and the
applicant and respondent No. 3 were known to each other for many years.
The respondent No. 3 had taken a hand loan of Rs. 8,00,000/- from the
applicant and the amount was to be repaid in annual installments of Rs.
80,000/- each and a deed for the same has been executed between the
parties. The respondent No. 3 did not repay the amount of the first
installment and hence, on demand, respondent No. 3 issued cheque No.
"055448" dated 05-04-2022 for Rs. 8,00,000/- from the account of the
firm with State Bank of India, Ranasan, Vijapur Branch. The cheque was
deposited by the applicant in his account with Bank of Baroda, Aaglod-
Falu Branch but the cheque returned unpaid with the endorsement
"Account Closed." The demand statutory notice was given, which was
duly served to tghe respondent Nos. 2 and 3 but the amount was not
repaid within the stipulated period and hence the applicant filed a
criminal complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act
before the Court of the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Vijapur, which
came to be registered as per Criminal Case No. 520 of 2024. After the
summons were duly served upon respondent Nos. 2 and 3, they appeared
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/18433/2025 ORDER DATED: 11/09/2025
undefined
before the learned trial Court and after their pleas were recorded, the
applicant filed the affidavit of examination-in-chief at Exh. 5 and
produced six documentary evidences in support of his case. Learned
advocate for the applicant submits that the applicant also produced the
deed executed between the parties at Exh. 13 along with other documents.
After the closing pursis was filed and the further statement of respondent
No. 3 was recorded, the respondent No. 3 stepped into the witness box
and deposed on oath at Exh. 19. Learned advocate for the applicant
submits that in the evidence, respondent No. 2 admitted that there were
financial transactions between the parties but did not produce any
evidence that the amount was repaid, whereas, the applicant proved
beyond reasonable doubt by oral and documentary evidence that there
was a legally enforceable due amount pending from respondent No. 2 and
3 towards which the cheque in question was given. Learned advocate for
the applicant submits that the learned trial Court did not appreciate the
evidence in proper perspective while passing the impugned judgment and
order of acquittal. Learned advocate for the applicant submits that the
applicant has a good case on merits and the application seeking leave to
appeal must be granted.
4. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Ms. Chetna Shah appearing
for the respondent No. 1 - State has submitted that learned trial Court has
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/18433/2025 ORDER DATED: 11/09/2025
undefined
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
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
