Bombay High Court
DIVYA JITEN NAGDAversusM/S. R. K. BOTTLING AND COMPANY AND ORS
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
- Bench
- SHIVKUMAR DIGE
Holding
An appellant is permitted to withdraw a pending criminal appeal and re‑file it before the Sessions Court, with the lower court treating any delay as if the appeal had remained pending before the High Court.
Summary
The appellants in three criminal appeals sought to withdraw their appeals before the Bombay High Court and instead file them before the Sessions Court. The court considered whether such withdrawal was permissible, referencing its own practice in similar matters and the Supreme Court decision in Celestium Financial v. A. Gnanasekaran. It held that the appellant could withdraw the appeal and that the Sessions Court would treat any delay as if the appeal had been pending before the High Court. The court also directed that the certified copy of the impugned order be returned to the appellant’s counsel for filing in the Sessions Court. Consequently, the court granted permission to withdraw the appeals and proceed in the lower court.
Issues considered
- Whether an appellant may withdraw a criminal appeal pending before the High Court and re‑file it before the Sessions Court.
- Whether the Sessions Court can consider the period of delay as part of the appeal proceedings.
Subjects
- withdrawal of appeal
- criminal appellate jurisdiction
- procedural law
- delay
- certified copy
- larger bench
Judgment
143-APEAL-215-2016.doc
Rohit Ghuge
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 215 OF 2016
Divya Jiten Nagda
Versus
M OF s. R. K. Bottling And Company And Ors
with
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 216 OF 2016
Anup Mahendra Shah
Versus
M OF s. R. K. Bottling And Company And Ors
with
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 217 OF 2016
Shilpa Deepak Savla
Versus
M OF s. R. K. Bottling And Company And Ors
_________________________________________________________________
Mr. M. D. Mali i/b Mr. M. D. Mali & Co., Advocate for the Appellant in all
matters.
Ms. Gauri Rao, APP for Respondent-State.
Mr. Shailesh Kantharia, Advocate for Respondent No. 3 in Appeal No.
215/16 to 217/16.
_________________________________________________________________
CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.
DATE : 4th MARCH, 2026.
P.C. :
. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned APP.
2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that this judgment is
referred to the larger bench.
3. This court in other similar matters permitted the appellant to
withdraw the appeal, hence, the appellant is permitted to withdraw the
Page 1 of 2
143-APEAL-215-2016.doc
Rohit Ghuge
appeal with liberty to file appeal before the learned Sessions Court as per
the view of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Celestium Financial Vs.
A. Gnanasekaran & Etc.1
4. Learned Sessions Court shall consider the delay, if appeal is
filed, as the appeal was pending before this 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
Court. On submitting a photocopy of the impugned order, Registry shall
verify the photocopy and return the certified copy to the learned advocate
for the applicant.
(SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)
1(2005) SC 2099.
Page 2 of 2
Checking your session…