Bombay High Court

SANKALP GRUHTARAN SAHKARI PATSANSTHA MARYADIT AJARAversusMASANU RAVAJI SUTAR AND ANR

Disposal: Disposed Off
Bench: RANJITSINHA RAJA BHONSALE

Holding

The application is transferred to the concerned District and Sessions Court and shall be treated as an appeal under the proviso to Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Summary

The applicant, Sankalp Gruhtaran Sahkari Patsanstha, filed a petition seeking leave to appeal an order of acquittal under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. Relying on the Supreme Court’s decision in M/s. Celestium Financial v. Ganasekaran (2025), the applicant requested that the appeal be transferred to the District and Sessions Court. The High Court, after hearing counsel, ordered the transfer of the proceedings to the appropriate District and Sessions Court, directing that the matter be treated as an appeal under the proviso to Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The court also directed that the time spent on this leave application be excluded when calculating the limitation period. Consequently, the application was disposed of, with the transfer order to be effected immediately.

Issues considered

What is the appropriate forum for filing an appeal against an acquittal under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act in light of the Supreme Court’s decision in Celestium Financial v. Ganasekaran?
Should the appeal be treated as an appeal under the proviso to Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure?
How should the period spent on the leave application affect the limitation period for the appeal?

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 372
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — s. 138

Subjects

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

Judgment

                                                       915-ALP-402-2017 (CR).docx


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

                    CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

           APPLN FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL (PVT.) NO. 402 OF 2017

Sankalp Gruhtaran Sahkari Patsanstha                 … Applicant
Maryadit Ajara
                  Versus
Masanu Ravaji Sutar And Anr.                         … Respondents



                                  ——————
Mr. Harshavardhan Patil for the Applicant.
Mr. C.D. Mali, A.P.P. for the Respondent-State.
                                  ——————

                    Coram :     RANJITSINHA RAJA BHONSALE, J.

                    Date   :    27th March 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
                                                            915-ALP-402-2017 (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. ]




osk                                  2 of 2

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…