Bombay High Court
VIJAY BALWANT TODKARversusRAVI SINGH THAKUR AND ORS
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
- Bench
- R N LADDHA
Holding
The appeal is transferred to the competent Sessions Court for disposal on its merits.
Summary
The appellant, Vijay Balwant Todkar, appealed against the acquittal of respondents No.1 and No.2 by a Judicial Magistrate First Class in a case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. No parties appeared before the High Court, and the Additional Public Prosecutor for the State argued that the appeal should be transferred to the appropriate Sessions Court to ensure a proper forum for adjudication. Relying on Supreme Court and High Court precedents, the Court agreed that there was no impediment to such a transfer. Consequently, the appeal was ordered to be transferred to the competent Sessions Court, with directions for prompt transmission of the record and speedy disposal. The appeal was thus disposed by transfer.
Issues considered
- Whether the High Court can transfer a criminal appeal under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act to a Sessions Court for proper adjudication
- Whether the appellant's right to a proper forum is being denied if the appeal remains in the High Court
Legislation cited
- Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — s. 138
Subjects
- Transfer of appeal
- Jurisdiction
- Negotiable Instruments Act
- Section 138
- Criminal procedure
- High Court
- Sessions Court
Judgment
Mamta Kale 24-apeal-535-2009.docx
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
Criminal Appeal No. 535 of 2009
Vijay Balwant Todkar
Partner M/s Key Soft Computer,
Aged 30 years, Occupation: Business,
Resident of – Nimbus Apartment,
Above Wamini Jewelers,
Before Bibwewadi Police Station,
Bibwewadi, Pune – 37. … Appellant
versus
Digitally
signed by
MAMTA
MAMTA AMAR
AMAR KALE
KALE Date:
2026.03.24
1. Ravi Singh Thakur
18:17:09
+0530
2. Meera Singh Thakur
Proprietor Blue Vergine,
Aged Major, Occupation Business,
Resident of – B-10, Sheetal
Apartment, Near Chandan Cinema,
Juhu, Mumbai – 400 009.
3. State of Maharashtra …Respondents
----
None for the Appellant.
None for Respondents No.1 and 2.
Mr Arfan Sait, APP, for Respondent No.3/ State.
----
Coram: R.N. Laddha, J.
Date: 24 March 2026
P.C.:
Page 1 of 3
__________________________________________________
24 March 2026
Mamta Kale 24-apeal-535-2009.docx
. The present appeal arises from the judgment and order
dated 30 September 2006, passed by the Judicial Magistrate
First Class, Pune, in C.C. No.10994 of 2004, whereby
respondents No.1 & 2 herein were acquitted of the offence
punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments
Act, 1881.
2. When the matter was taken up for hearing today, none
appeared for the appellant and respondents No.1 and 2. The
learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing respondent
No.3/ State, placing reliance upon the decision of the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in Celestium Financial vs A. Gnanasekaran,
2025 SCC OnLine SC 1320, submits that the present appeal
may be transferred to the concerned Sessions Court so that the
appellant can effectively exercise his right and is not deprived
of a proper adjudicatory forum. Reliance is also placed on
Pankaj Mehta vs Vishal Hundar, 2026 SCC OnLine MP 800;
Sunil Kumar vs Daljit Kaur, 2025:PHHC:092344; and Raj
Kumar vs Rajender, 2025:PHHC:079740 to submit that there
is no impediment for transferring the present appeal to the
concerned Sessions Court.
3. Considering the submissions and the decisions cited
above, this Court deems it appropriate to transfer the appeal to
Page 2 of 3
__________________________________________________
24 March 2026
Mamta Kale 24-apeal-535-2009.docx
the competent Sessions Court so that appellant may pursue the
statutory remedy without being denied an appropriate forum.
Accordingly, the learned Registrar (Judicial) is directed to
ensure prompt transmission of the entire record of the case to
the concerned Sessions Court. Upon receipt, the Sessions Court
shall register the appeal and proceed to decide it on its merits
and in accordance with law. Given the prolonged pendency of
the matter, the learned Sessions Judge is requested to dispose of
the proceedings at the earliest.
4. The present appeal is disposed of in the above terms.
(R.N. Laddha, J.)
Page 3 of 3
__________________________________________________
24 March 2026
Checking your session…