Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

ASHOK S/O MULCHAND AGRAWALversusGANGADHAR S/O VISHWANATH PATIL

Disposal
Transfer to other court

Holding

The applications are transferred to the concerned District and Sessions Court and shall be treated as appeals under the proviso to Section 372 CrPC, with the period spent on the applications excluded from the limitation calculation.

Summary

Ashok Agrawal filed multiple applications seeking leave to appeal an order of acquittal under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. He relied on the Supreme Court’s decision in Celestium Financial v. Ganasekaran (2025) to argue that the appeals should be heard by the District and Sessions Court. The High Court, after considering the submissions, ordered that the applications be transferred to the appropriate District and Sessions Court and that the matters be treated as appeals under the proviso to Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Court also directed that the period spent filing these leave applications not be counted towards the limitation period. Consequently, the leave applications were disposed off.

Issues considered

  • Whether leave applications for appeal against an acquittal under Section 138 NI Act can be transferred to the District and Sessions Court.
  • Whether the Supreme Court’s ruling in Celestium Financial v. Ganasekaran applies to such appeals.
  • Whether the appeals should be treated as appeals under the proviso to Section 372 CrPC.
  • Whether the time spent on these applications should be excluded from the limitation period.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • Section 138 NI Act
  • appeal against acquittal
  • transfer of jurisdiction
  • Section 372 CrPC
  • limitation period
  • leave to appeal
  • Supreme Court precedent

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:43009


                                                                    915-ALP-135-2018.odt




                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
                                    BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                     915 APPLN. FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL BY PVT. PARTY NO. 135 OF 2018

                                ASHOK S/O MULCHAND AGRAWAL
                                           VERSUS
                               GANGADHAR S/O VISHWANATH PATIL
                                               .…
                 Mr. Amol S. Sawant, Advocate for Applicant
                 Ms Shreyashree S. Pujari h/f Mr. S. S. Panale Advocate for
                 Respondent
                                               .…

                                         WITH
                 APPLN. FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL BY PVT. PARTY NO. 132 OF 2018

                                 ASHOK S/O MULCHAND AGRAWAL
                                               VERSUS
                               GANGADHAR S/O VISHWANATH PATIL
                                                  .…
                 Mr. Amol S. Sawant, Advocate for Applicant
                 Mr. R.P. Totala h/f Mr. Rahul R. Sancheti, Advocate for Respondent
                                                  .…

                                         WITH
                 APPLN. FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL BY PVT. PARTY NO. 133 OF 2018

                                 ASHOK S/O MULCHAND AGRAWAL
                                               VERSUS
                               GANGADHAR S/O VISHWANATH PATIL
                                                  .…
                 Mr. Amol S. Sawant, Advocate for Applicant
                 Mr. R.P. Totala h/f Mr. Rahul R. Sancheti, Advocate for Respondent
                                                  .…




                                                                                  1 of 3
                                   (( 2 ))           915-ALP-135-2018




                             WITH
     APPLN. FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL BY PVT. PARTY NO. 134 OF 2018

                  ASHOK S/O MULCHAND AGRAWAL
                                VERSUS
                GANGADHAR S/O VISHWANATH PATIL
                                   .…
Mr. Amol S. Sawant, Advocate for Applicant
Mr. R.P. Totala h/f Mr. Rahul R. Sancheti, Advocate for Respondent
                                   .…
                                 WITH
 APPLN. FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL BY PVT. PARTY NO. 136 OF 2018

                  ASHOK S/O MULCHAND AGRAWAL
                                VERSUS
                GANGADHAR S/O VISHWANATH PATIL
                                   .…
Mr. Amol S. Sawant, Advocate for Applicant
Mr. R.P. Totala h/f Mr. Rahul R. Sancheti, Advocate for Respondent
                                   .…

                     CORAM : ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J.

                        DATE : 22 September, 2026
PER COURT :-

1.           Learned counsel for the applicant points out that, the all

these applications have 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


                                                                        2 of 3
                                     (( 3 ))            915-ALP-135-2018




would contest the appeals 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 :

                                 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 these matters to the concerned District and
              Sessions Court, immediately.

      (ii)    The learned Trial Court to whom these matters will be
              assigned, after registering it, shall issue notice to the
              concerned parties, and thereafter, proceed further with
              the matters in accordance with law.

      (iii)   The concerned Trial Court shall treat these matters as
              appeals 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 applications before this
              Court while calculating the period of limitation.

      (v)     Applications stand disposed off.



                                      [ ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J. ]
SMS




                                                                           3 of 3


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.