Bombay High Court

CHANDRAPANDHARI GRAMIN BIGAR SHETI SAH. PAT.MARYADIT, THROU. ITS MANAGER KAILAS VITHAL GUDGEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

Disposal: Transfer to other court
Bench: ABHAY S WAGHWASE

Holding

The High Court ordered the transfer of the appeal to the District and Sessions Court and directed it to be dealt with as an appeal under the proviso to Section 372 CrPC.

Summary

The cooperative society Chandrapandhari Gramin Bigar Sheti Sahakari Patsanstha applied to the Bombay High Court for leave to appeal an acquittal under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Relying on the Supreme Court’s decision in Celestium Financial v. Ganasekaran (2025), the applicant sought to have the appeal heard by the District and Sessions Court. The High Court, after considering the precedent, ordered that the matter be transferred to the concerned District and Sessions Court. The transferred court is directed to treat the proceeding as an appeal under the proviso to Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and to exclude the time spent before the High Court when calculating any delay. The order thus grants the leave application and mandates the transfer.

Issues considered

Whether a leave to appeal application under Section 138 NI Act can be transferred to a District and Sessions Court
Whether the Supreme Court’s ruling in Celestium Financial v. Ganasekaran applies to treat such appeal as one under the proviso to Section 372 CrPC

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 372
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — s. 138

Subjects

Section 138
Negotiable Instruments Act
appeal
transfer of jurisdiction
Code of Criminal Procedure
Section 372 proviso
leave to appeal
Supreme Court precedent

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:6894


                                                                        919-ALP-7-2026
                                                   -1-

                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                     BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                    919 APPLN. FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL BY PVT. PARTY NO. 7 OF 2026

                Chandrapandhari Gramin Bigar Sheti
                Sahakari Patsanstha Maryadit,
                Pohegaon, Taluka Kopargaon,
                District Ahmednagar,
                through its Authorized Officer/Manager,
                Kailas s/o Vithal Gudge,
                R/o Pohegaon, Taluka Kopargaon,
                District Ahmednagar.                              ... Applicant

                        Versus

                1.      The State of Maharashtra

                2.    Vijay s/o Bhagwat Bankar
                      Age 48 Years, Occu : Business,
                      R/o Khandoba Chowk, Rahata,
                      Taluka Rahata, District Ahmednagar.      ... Respondents
                                                  ...
                Advocate for Appellant : Mr. Gandhi Amol Subhash
                APP for Respondent-State : Mr. B. V. Virdhe
                                                  ...

                                                CORAM :     ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J.
                                                DATED :     17 FEBRUARY, 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
                                                         919-ALP-7-2026
                                   -2-

learned District and Sessions Court and hence urges that the

application 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 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.    The concerned Sessions Court to exclude the time spent before
this Court for prosecuting the instant leave application while
calculating the period of delay, if any.



                                           [ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J.]

vre

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…