Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

JAYSINH RAMCHANDRA GHORPADEversusSATISH SHANKAR SATHE AND ANR

Disposal
Disposed Off

Holding

The High Court ordered the transfer of the appeal to the District and Sessions Court, to be treated as an appeal under the proviso to Section 372 CrPC, and excluded the time spent on the leave application from the limitation period.

Summary

The applicant, Jaysinh Ramchandra Ghorpade, filed an application 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 M/s. Celestium Financial v. Ganasekaran (2025) to argue that the appeal should be transferred to the District and Sessions Court and treated as an appeal under the proviso to Section 372 of the CrPC. The High Court, after hearing counsel, ordered the transfer of the proceedings to the appropriate District and Sessions Court, directing that the matter be dealt with as an appeal under Section 372 and that the time spent on the leave application be excluded for limitation purposes. The court also directed the lower court to issue notices and proceed in accordance with law. The application was consequently disposed of.

Issues considered

  • Whether an application for leave to appeal against an acquittal under Section 138 NI Act can be transferred to a District and Sessions Court.
  • Whether the Supreme Court’s observations in Celestium Financial v. Ganasekaran are applicable to treat the appeal under the proviso to Section 372 CrPC.
  • Whether the period spent prosecuting the leave application should be excluded while computing the limitation period.

Legislation cited

Subjects

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

Judgment

                                                      924-1-ALP-183-2022 (CR).docx


          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                   CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR

                   CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

          APPLN FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL (PVT.) NO. 183 OF 2022

Jaysinh Ramchandra Ghorpade                          … Applicant
                   Versus
Satish Shankar Sathe And Anr.                        … Respondents


                                  ——————
Mr. Abhay A. Jadhavar i/b. Mr. Makrand M. Kale for the Applicant.
Mr. Aditya Ghadge i/b. Mr. Akshay Kulkarni for the Respondent No.1.
Mr. S.H. Yadav, A.P.P. for the Respondent No.2-State.
                                  ——————

                   Coram :      RANJITSINHA RAJA BHONSALE, J.

                   Date     :   30th April 2026.

PER COURT :

1.    Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2.    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, 1881. He prays that, now, in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme

Court in M/s. Celestium Financial          Vs. Ganasekaran ETC., reported in

[(2025) SCC    OnLine SC 1320], the Applicant would contest the appeal




osk                               1 of 2
                                                                             924-1-ALP-183-2022 (CR).docx


                   before the learned District and Sessions Court and hence urges that, the same

                   be transferred to the District Court.

                   3.         In view of the above, the following order is passed :

                                                           ORDER

                     (i)         The present proceeding 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 concerned 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 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
                                 M/s. 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)         The Application therefore stands disposed of.



                                                       [ RANJITSINHA RAJA BHONSALE, J. ]
           Digitally signed
           by OMKAR
           SHIVAHAR
OMKAR      KUMBHAKARN
SHIVAHAR
KUMBHAKARN Date:
           2026.04.30
           19:21:13
           +0530




                   osk                                    2 of 2


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.