Bombay High Court
RAJKUMAR BABURAM GUPTAversusREHAMATULLAH M.S. KHAN AND ANR.
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
- Bench
- GAURI GODSE
Holding
The applicant is granted liberty to withdraw the Section 378(4) application and to file an appeal under Section 372 CrPC, with the pendency of the withdrawn application counted for condonation of delay.
Summary
The complainant, Rajkumar Baburam Gupta, filed a criminal application under Section 378(4) of the CrPC seeking leave to appeal an acquittal of Respondent No.1 in a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Relying on the Supreme Court’s decision in Celestium Financial v. A. Gnanasekaran (2025), counsel argued that the applicant was entitled to file an appeal under Section 372 of the CrPC and should be allowed to condone any delay by counting the pendency of the present application. The Bombay High Court, after considering the precedent, granted the applicant liberty to withdraw the application and to file a Section 372 appeal in the Sessions Court within eight weeks, permitting the period of pendency to be used for condonation of delay. The court also directed the return of a certified copy of the impugned order upon submission of a photocopy. The application was consequently disposed of as withdrawn, subject to the liberty granted.
Issues considered
- Whether the complainant is entitled to file an appeal under Section 372 CrPC after an acquittal in a Section 138 NI Act case.
- Whether the pendency of the Section 378(4) application can be counted towards condonation of delay for filing the Section 372 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
- appeal
- Section 372 CrPC
- condonation of delay
- acquittal
- Negotiable Instruments Act
- Criminal Procedure Code
- Supreme Court precedent
Judgment
9-ALP-452-2018.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
rrpillai
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 452 OF 2018
Rajkumar Baburam Gupta ….Applicant
vs.
Rehamatullah M. S. Khan and Another … Respondents
Mr. Ram Mani Upadhyay for the Applicant.
Mr. D. J. Haldankar, APP for the Respondent - 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
14:24:25
+0530
9-ALP-452-2018.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 26th November 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
9-ALP-452-2018.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
Checking your session…