Bombay High Court
SHRI SAI EQUIPMENT PVT LTD THROUGH RAJENDRA JANARDHAN PATILversusSUNITA SATISH SONAR PROPRIETOR SHRADDHA ENGINEERS COMPANY
- Disposal
- Transfer to other court
- Bench
- ABHAY S WAGHWASE
Holding
The appeal should be transferred to the District and Sessions Court and treated as an appeal under the proviso to Section 372 CrPC, with the period spent on the leave application excluded from limitation.
Summary
The applicant, Sai Equipment Pvt Ltd, filed an application seeking leave to appeal an order of acquittal under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Relying on the Supreme Court’s decision in Celestium Financial v. Ganasekaran, the applicant requested that the appeal be transferred to the District and Sessions Court. The High Court, after considering the submission, ordered the transfer of the proceedings to the concerned District and Sessions Court. The Court directed that the appeal be treated as an appeal under the proviso to Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, in line with the Supreme Court’s observations. It also directed that the period spent prosecuting the leave application be excluded from the limitation period calculation.
Issues considered
- Whether leave to appeal against an acquittal under Section 138 NI Act can be transferred to the District and Sessions Court.
- Whether the appeal should be governed by the proviso to Section 372 CrPC as per the Supreme Court’s decision in Celestium Financial.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 372
- Negotiable Instruments Act — s. 138
Subjects
- Section 138 NI Act
- appeal against acquittal
- transfer of proceedings
- Section 372 CrPC
- limitation period
- Celestium Financial precedent
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:1690
-1-
924-alp-56-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
APPLN. FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL BY PVT. PARTY NO. 56 OF 2024
SHRI SAI EQUIPMENT PVT LTD THROUGH RAJENDRA JANARDHAN PATIL
VERSUS
SUNITA SATISH SONAR PROPRIETOR SHRADDHA ENGINEERS COMPANY
......
Advocate for Appellant : Mr. Yuvraj S. Choudhari
Advocate for Respondent : Mr. Tapan Kishor Sant
......
CORAM : ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J.
DATED : 17 JANUARY 2026
PER COURT :
1. 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. He prays that, now, in view of the decision of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in Celestium Financial v. Ganasekaran Etc.
[(2025) SCC OnLine SC 1320], he would contest the appeal before
learned District and Sessions Court and hence urges that, the same be
transferred to the District Court.
2. In view of the above, the following order is passed :
ORDER
I. The present proceedings be transferred to the concerned
District and Sessions Court. Learned Registrar (Judicial) of
-2-
924-alp-56-2024
this Court to take further necessary action for transferring
this matter to the concerned District and Sessions Court,
immediately.
II. The learned Sessions 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 Sessions 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 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.
(ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J.)
Tandale
Checking your session…