Bombay High Court
SHAIKH TOUFIQ SHAIKH SHABUversusNAZIR MOHAMMAD ISSAQUE AND OTHERS
- Disposal
- Transfer to other court
Holding
The leave application is transferred to the concerned District and Sessions Court, to be dealt with as an appeal under the proviso to Section 372 CrPC, and the period spent before this Court is excluded from the limitation calculation.
Summary
The applicant filed a petition seeking leave to appeal an acquittal under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, invoking the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Celestium Financial v. Ganasekaran. The High Court, after considering the precedent, ordered that the matter be transferred to the appropriate District and Sessions Court. The transferred case is to be treated as an appeal under the proviso to Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, following the Supreme Court’s observations. The Court further directed that the time spent prosecuting this leave application be excluded when calculating the limitation period for the appeal. The application was thereafter disposed of.
Issues considered
- Whether a leave to appeal against an acquittal under Section 138 NI Act can be transferred to a District and Sessions Court in view of the Supreme Court’s decision in Celestium Financial v. Ganasekaran.
- Whether the appeal should be governed by the proviso to Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
- Whether the period spent before the High Court on the leave application should be excluded from the limitation period for the appeal.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 372
- Negotiable Instruments Act — s. 138
Subjects
- Section 138
- Negotiable Instruments Act
- appeal
- transfer of jurisdiction
- Section 372
- Code of Criminal Procedure
- limitation period
- Supreme Court precedent
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:40179
921-ALP-100-2025.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
921 APPLN. FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL BY PVT. PARTY NO. 100 OF 2025
SHAIKH TOUFIQ SHAIKH SHABU
VERSUS
NAZIR MOHAMMAD ISSAQUE AND OTHERS
.…
Mr. D. S. Ingole h/f Mr. Nilesh S. Ghanekar, Advocate for Applicant
.…
CORAM : ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J.
DATE : 03 September, 2026
PER COURT :-
1. Learned counsel for the applicant points out that, the
instant application has been preferred seeking leave to file appeal
against the order of acquittal from offence under Section 138 of
the Negotiable Instruments Act. He prays that, now, in view of the
decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Celestium
Financial v. Ganasekaran Etc. [(2025) SCC OnLine SC 1320], he
would contest the appeal before learned District and Sessions
Court and hence urges that, the same be transferred to the District
Court.
2. In view of the above, the following order is passed :
1 of 2
(( 2 )) 921-ALP-100-2025
ORDER
(i) The present proceedings be transferred to the concerned
District and Sessions Court. Learned Registrar (Judicial)
of this Court to take further necessary action for
transferring this matter to the concerned District and
Sessions Court, immediately.
(ii) The learned Trial Court to whom this matter will be
assigned, after registering it, shall issue notice to the
concerned parties, and thereafter, proceed further with
the matter in accordance with law.
(iii) The concerned Trial Court shall treat this matter as
appeal under proviso to Section 372 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure as per the observations of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the case of Celestium Financial (supra).
(iv) Learned District and Sessions Judge to exclude the period
spent in prosecuting instant leave application before this
Court while calculating the period of limitation.
(v) Application stands disposed off.
[ ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J. ]
SMS
2 of 2
Checking your session…