Bombay High Court

C.A. CONSULTANTSversusTHINKING MACHINES PVT. LTD. AND ORS.

Decided: 22 June 2026
Disposal: Disposed Off
Bench: N R BORKAR

Holding

The appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution due to the appellant's non‑appearance and inability to be served.

Summary

The appellant C.A. Consultants appealed against the acquittal of Thinking Machines Pvt. Ltd. and others by a Judicial Magistrate in a case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The magistrate had found the respondents not guilty. The appellant’s counsel failed to appear, and the court later discovered that the appellant could not be located at the address provided. Consequently, the High Court dismissed the appeal on the ground of want of prosecution. No substantive merits of the Section 138 claim were examined. The dismissal was based solely on procedural default due to the appellant’s non‑appearance and unknown whereabouts.

Issues considered

What is the appropriate course of action when an appellant fails to appear and cannot be located?
Is dismissal for want of prosecution permissible in a criminal appeal under the Negotiable Instruments Act?

Legislation cited

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — s. 138

Subjects

Section 138
Negotiable Instruments Act
appeal dismissed
want of prosecution
criminal procedure

Judgment

                                  1               35-APEAL 617-07.doc



              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                    CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                     CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.617 OF 2007

C. A. Consultants                      … Appellant
       Vs.
Thinking Machines Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.       … Respondents
                                      -----
None for the Appellant.
None for Respondent Nos.1 to 3.
Mr. V. N. Sagare, APP for the Respondent-State.
                                    -----
                                CORAM : N.R. BORKAR, J.
                                DATE      : 22ND JUNE 2026
P.C. :
1.       This Appeal is filed against the judgement and order dated 15 th
September 2006 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Nashik in
Summary Criminal Case No.4407 of 2003.

2.       By the impugned judgement and order, the Learned Judicial
Magisrate has acquitted Respondent Nos.1 to 3 herein for the offence
punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

3.       Due to non-appearance of Learned Counsel for the Appellant, this
Court on 17th February 2026 had issued notice to the Appellant. The report
submitted by the concerned police station shows that the Appellant is not
residing on the address mentioned in the Appeal and his whereabouts are
not known.

4.       In that view of the matter, the Appeal is dismissed for want of
prosecution.


                                             (N.R. BORKAR, J.)

     Mugdha                                                             1 of 1

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…