Bombay High Court
DHANANJAY VISHWASRAO BHOITEversusVILAS SANTARAM SARODE AND ANR
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The appeal is to be transferred to the District and Sessions Court and treated as an appeal under the proviso to Section 372 CrPC, with the time spent before the High Court excluded from the limitation period.
Summary
The applicant, Dhananjay Vishwasrao Bhoite, filed a leave application seeking permission to appeal an acquittal under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. He relied on the Supreme Court’s decision in M/s. Celestium Financial v. Ganasekaran (2025) to argue that the appeal should be heard by the District and Sessions Court. The High Court considered whether the Supreme Court precedent mandated transfer of the appeal and how the limitation period should be computed. The Court ordered the matter to be transferred to the appropriate District and Sessions Court, directing it to treat the case as an appeal under the proviso to Section 372 of the CrPC. It also directed that the time spent before the High Court be excluded from the limitation period calculation, and disposed of the leave application.
Issues considered
- Whether the appeal against an acquittal under Section 138 NI Act should be transferred to the District and Sessions Court in view of the Supreme Court’s decision in Celestium Financial.
- Whether the period spent filing the leave application before the High Court should be excluded from the limitation period under Section 372 CrPC.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 372
- Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — s. 138
Subjects
- Section 138 NI Act
- appeal transfer
- limitation period
- Section 372 CrPC
- Supreme Court precedent
Judgment
21-ALP-334-2019 (CR).docx
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
APPLN FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL (PVT.) NO. 334 OF 2019
Dhananjay Vishwasrao Bhoite … Applicant
Versus
Vilas Santaram Sarode And Anr … Respondents
——————
Mr. Onkar Bajaj for the Applicant.
Mrs. S.N. Deshmukh, A.P.P. for the Respondent No.2-State.
——————
Coram : RANJITSINHA RAJA BHONSALE, J.
Date : 18th April 2026.
PER COURT :
1. Heard learned counsel for the Applicant and learned A.P.P. for
Respondent No.2 - State.
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
osk 1 of 2
21-ALP-334-2019 (CR).docx
[(2025) SCC OnLine SC 1320], the Applicant would contest the appeal
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
OMKAR SHIVAHAR
SHIVAHAR KUMBHAKARN
KUMBHAKARN Date:
2026.04.18
18:43:53 +0530
osk 2 of 2
Checking your session…