Bombay High Court
M/S. A.B. AND U. COMMUNICATION PVT. LTD.versusM/S. DHAVAL ENTERPRISES AND ANR.
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
- Bench
- R N LADDHA
Holding
The appeal is dismissed due to the appellant's non‑compliance with procedural requirements, including failure to pay court fees and prosecute the appeal.
Summary
M/s. AB and U Communication Pvt. Ltd. appealed against the acquittal of M/s. Dhaval Enterprises under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, as recorded by the Metropolitan Magistrate in 2008. The appeal, filed in 2009, remained pending for several years with no appearance by the appellant and without payment of the requisite court fees. The High Court observed that the appellant’s failure to prosecute the appeal and comply with mandatory procedural requirements demonstrated a lack of diligence. Consequently, the Court found no justification to keep the matter pending indefinitely. The appeal was therefore dismissed, leaving the original acquittal undisturbed.
Issues considered
- What is the effect of the appellant's failure to appear and pay court fees on the pending appeal?
- Can an appeal against an acquittal under Section 138 NI Act be dismissed on grounds of procedural default and undue delay?
Legislation cited
- Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — s. 138
Subjects
- Section 138
- Negotiable Instruments Act
- appeal dismissal
- procedural default
- court fees
- criminal appeal
- acquittal
Judgment
SMITA Digitally signed by SMITA
JOHNSON GONSALVES
JOHNSON Date: 2026.03.25
GONSALVES 16:24:50 +0530
sg 19.apeal118-09.docx
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
Criminal Appeal No. 118 of 2009
M/s. AB and U Communication Pvt. Ltd.
through its Authorized Officer,
Mr Vasant Mistry, 3/A, Lower Ground,
Kamanwala Chamber, Mogul Lane,
Mahim (W), Mumbai – 400 016
Mr Ram K Maurya has been
substituted as New representative
of the complaint as per
Order dated 2nd March 2005 … Appellant
versus
1. M/s. Dhaval Enterprises
a Proprietorship concern represented
by Shri Jitu Shah, H Kantilal Compound,
Andheri Kurla Road, Andheri (E),
Mumbai 400 072
2.The State of Maharashtra … Respondents
----
None for the appellant.
None for respondent No.1.
Ms GS Mulekar, APP, for respondent No.2/ State.
----
Coram: R.N. Laddha, J.
Date: 24 March 2026.
P.C.:
. By way of the present appeal, the appellant seeks to
Page 1 of 2
__________________________________________________
24 March 2026
sg 19.apeal118-09.docx
challenge the acquittal of respondent No.1 for the offence
punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments
Act, 1881, as recorded by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate,
12th Court, Bandra, Mumbai, in the judgment and order dated
12 September 2008 passed in CC No.833/SS/2005 (old
No.1475/S/2003).
2. When the matter was called out for hearing today, none
appeared on behalf of the appellant. The record, including the
office note, reveals that the present appeal has been pending
since the year 2009, and despite the lapse of considerable time,
the appellant has failed to comply with the procedural
requirement of payment of requisite Court fees.
3. The continued non-prosecution of the appeal, coupled
with non-compliance of mandatory procedural requirements,
demonstrates a lack of diligence on the part of the appellant.
In such circumstances, this Court finds no justification to keep
the matter pending indefinitely.
4. In the circumstances, this Court has no any other option
except to dismiss the appeal. Accordingly, the present appeal
stands dismissed.
(R.N. Laddha, J.)
Page 2 of 2
__________________________________________________
24 March 2026
Checking your session…