Bombay High Court

SURESH WAMANRAO GAIKWADversusSUNANDA SHARAD TAYADE AND ANR

Decided: 23 January 2026
Disposal: Disposed Off
Bench: GAURI GODSE

Holding

The court granted leave to withdraw the application and liberty to file an appeal under Section 372 of the CrPC, allowing the benefit of the pendency period for condonation of delay.

Summary

The original complainant, Suresh Gaikawad, filed a criminal application under Section 378(4) of the CrPC seeking leave to appeal an acquittal of Sunanda Tayade under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Relying on the Supreme Court’s decision in Celestium Financial v. A. Gnanasekaran (2025 SCC OnLine SC 1320), the applicant argued that he was entitled to file an appeal under Section 372 of the CrPC and should be allowed the benefit of the pendency of the present application for condoning any delay. The Bombay High Court granted leave to withdraw the application and gave liberty to file the Section 372 appeal in the Sessions Court within eight weeks, permitting the applicant to claim the pendency period for condonation of delay. The court also directed the advocate to obtain a certified copy of the impugned order for filing the appeal. The application was disposed of as withdrawn subject to the liberty granted.

Issues considered

Whether the complainant is entitled to file an appeal under Section 372 of the CrPC after an acquittal under the Negotiable Instruments Act.
Whether the pendency of the present application can be counted towards condonation of delay for filing the appeal.
Whether the Supreme Court decision in Celestium Financial v. A. Gnanasekaran is applicable to the present facts.

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 372, 378(4)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — s. 138

Subjects

Criminal appeal
Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act
Section 372 CrPC
Condonation of delay
Leave to appeal
Supreme Court precedent

Judgment

                                                                     8-ALP-440-2018.doc




                             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
          rrpillai
                                      CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                                     CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 440 OF 2018

                        Suresh Gaikawad                               ….Applicant
                               vs.
                        Sunanda Tayade and Another                     … Respondents

                        Mr. Aditya Hegde a/w. Mr. Mayuresh Ingale i/b. Mr. Akshay
                        Petkar for the Applicant.
                        Ms. Shilpa G. Talhar, APP for the State.


                                                     CORAM : GAURI GODSE, J.

                                                     DATED : 23rd JANUARY 2026

                        ORDER:

                        1.    This application is filed by the original complainant under

                        Section 378(4) of the Criminal Procedure Code, seeking leave

                        to file appeal. The applicant is the complainant in the complaint

                        filed under Section 138 of The Negotiable Instruments Act,

                        1881. By the impugned order respondent no. 1 is acquitted.

                        2.    Learned counsel for the applicant submits that in view of

                        the recent decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of

                        M/s. Celestium Financial Versus. A. Gnanasekaran 1, the
           Digitally
           signed by
           RAJESHWARI   1 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1320
RAJESHWARI RAMESH
RAMESH     PILLAI                                      1/3
PILLAI     Date:
           2026.01.28
           14:24:24
           +0530
                                              8-ALP-440-2018.doc



applicant would be entitled to file an appeal under Section 372

of Code of Criminal Procedure. He therefore seeks leave to

withdraw this application with liberty to file an appeal under

Section 372 of Cr.P.C. in the Sessions Court. Learned counsel

for the applicant submits that the applicant be granted benefit

of the period of pendency of this application for seeking

condonation of delay.

3.   In view of the legal principles settled in the decision of the

Hon’ble Apex Court, the applicant is granted leave to withdraw

this application with liberty to file an appeal under Section 372

of Cr.P.C. before the Sessions Court.

4.   This application is filed on 3 rd October 2018. Hence, it is

clarified that if an appeal under Section 372 of Cr.P.C. is filed

within eight weeks from today, the applicant shall be entitled to

seek benefit of the period of pendency of this application for

seeking condonation of delay in filing the appeal before the

Sessions Court.

5.   Learned advocate for the applicant is permitted to take

back certified copy of the impugned order for filing the appeal

in the Sessions Courts, on submitting a photocopy of the
                               2/3
                                              8-ALP-440-2018.doc



impugned order. Registry shall verify the photocopy and return

the certified copy to the learned advocate for the applicant.

6.    The Application is disposed of as withdrawn subject to

the aforesaid liberty.




                                            (GAURI GODSE, J.)




                               3/3

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…