Gujarat High Court
Parasmal Hagamilal Jain vs Tulsi Ram G. Gurjjar on 22 September, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/19336/2025 ORDER DATED: 22/09/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL) NO. 19336
of 2025
In F/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 36085 of 2025
==========================================================
PARASMAL HAGAMILAL JAIN
Versus
TULSI RAM G. GURJJAR & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. GUNJAN A DALAL(18612) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MRS NISHA M PARIKH(2397) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS.C.M.SHAH, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE S.V. PINTO
Date : 22/09/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. The present application is filed by the applicant - original
complainant under Section 419 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha
Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as "the BNSS") seeking leave to file
the appeal against the judgment and order dated 01-08-2025 passed by
the learned Additional Sessions Judge, City Civil & Sessions Court,
Ahmedabad (hereinafter referred to as the " the learned Sessions Court)
acquitting the respondent No. 1 in Criminal Appeal No. 273 of 2024 filed
by the respondent No. 1 challenging the judgment and order of conviction
passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ahmedabad
( hereinafter referred to as "the learned Trial Court) in Criminal Case No.
30416 of 2022 for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/19336/2025 ORDER DATED: 22/09/2025
undefined
Instrument Act, 1881. (hereinafter referred to as the NI Act).
2. Heard learned advocate Ms. Nisha Parikh appearing on line for the
applicant and learned APP Ms. Chetna Shah for the respondent No.2 -
State.
3. Learned advocate Ms. Nisha Parikh for the applicant submits that
the applicant and the respondent No. 1 were known to each other and the
applicant had advanced an amount of Rs.18,00,000/- to the respondent
No. 1 between 15-11-2017 to 27-10-2018. The amount was given as a
hand loan and when the amount was to be repaid, the respondent No. 1
issued three cheques being cheque No. "701591" dated 19-01-2022 for
an amount of Rs.2,50,000/-, cheque No. "701592" dated 20-01-2022 for
an amount of Rs.2,50,000/- and cheque No. "701599" dated 24-01-2022
for an amount of Rs.2,50,000/- from his account with Indian Bank,
Naranpura Branch, Ahmedabad. The cheques were deposited by the
applicant in his account but the cheques returned unpaid with the
endorsement " Other reasons / No PPS ". The applicant sent the demand
statutory notice, which was duly served to the respondent No. 1 but the
respondent No.1 did not repay the amount within the stipulated period
and hence, the applicant filed a criminal complaint under Section 138 of
the N.I. Act before the Court of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate,
Ahmedabad, which came to be registered as Criminal Case No. 30416 of
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/19336/2025 ORDER DATED: 22/09/2025
undefined
2022. After the respondent No. 1 was duly served with the summons, he
appeared before the learned trial Court and the plea was recorded at Exh.
6. The applicant submitted his affidavit of examination-in-chief at Exh.3
and produced sixteen documentary evidence in support of his case and
after the closing pursis of the applicant was filed, the further statement of
the respondent No. 1 under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C was recorded. After
the arguments of the learned advocates for both parties were heard, the
learned trial Court, by a judgement and order dated 06-03-2024 was
pleased to convict the respondent No. 1 for the offence of under Section
138 of N.I.Act and sentence the respondent No. 1 to simple imprisonment
for a period of one year and ordered the respondent No. 1 to pay an
amount of Rs.7,50,000/- within a period of two months from the date of
the order as compensation to the applicant and in default to undergo
simple imprisonment for three months.
3.1 Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and order of
conviction, the respondent No. 1 filed Criminal Appeal No. 273 of 2024
before the City Civil & Sessions Court, Ahmedabad and after the
arguments of the learned advocates for both the parties were heard, the
learned Additional Sessions Judge, City Civil & Sessions Court, Court
No. 26, Ahmedabad, by the impugned judgement and order dated 01-08-
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/19336/2025 ORDER DATED: 22/09/2025
undefined
2025 was pleased to allow the appeal and acquit the respondent No. 1 for
the offence under Section 138 of the NI Act.
3.2 Learned advocate for the applicant submits that the learned
Sessions Court has acquitted the respondent No.1 mainly on the ground
that case was not filed within the period of limitation as the amount was
advanced in the year 2017 and 2018 and the cheques were of the year
2022. Learned advocate further submits that the learned Appellate Court
did not consider that the period of limitation was condoned during the
period of pandemic COVID-19 and the cheques were given by the
respondent No. 1 as an acknowledgment of the debt and were within the
period of limitation. Learned advocate for the applicant submits that the
applicant has good case on merits and the entire evidence is properly
appreciated by the learned trial Court whereas the learned Sessions Court
has not appreciated the evidence in proper perspective and hence the
application seeking leave to appeal must be granted.
4. Learned APP Ms. Chetna Shah for the respondent No.2 - State
submits that learned appellate Court has appreciated all the evidence and
no interference is required and hence the application may be rejected.
5. Considering the submissions advanced by the learned advocate for
the applicant as also on perusal of the impugned judgment and order
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/19336/2025 ORDER DATED: 22/09/2025
undefined
passed by the learned appellate Court, Ahmedabad and the judgment and
order of conviction passed by the learned trial Court, prima-facie, it
appears that the same set of evidence have been appreciated by two
Courts in a different manner and hence, the issue requires consideration.
Hence, the application seeking leave to appeal deserves consideration.
Consequently, the same is allowed.
(S. V. PINTO,J)
VVM
