Bombay High Court
OMPRAKASH RATANLAL MALPANIversusPANCHAKSHARI GAURISHANKAR APPA MITKARI
- Disposal
- Transfer to other court
Holding
The appeal is to be transferred to the concerned District and Sessions Court and shall be dealt with as an appeal under the proviso to Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Summary
The appellant, Omprakash Ratanlal Malpani, appealed against an order of acquittal in a case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Relying on the Supreme Court’s decision in Celestium Financial v. Ganasekaran (2025), the appellant sought transfer of the appeal to the District and Sessions Court. The High Court, after hearing counsel, ordered the transfer, directing the Sessions Court to treat the matter as an appeal under the proviso to Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Court also directed that the time spent before the High Court not be counted towards the limitation period and that the appeal be decided promptly due to the appellant’s age. The order thus re‑directs the procedural forum and sets parameters for the continuation of the appeal.
Issues considered
- Whether an appeal against an acquittal under Section 138 NI Act can be transferred from the High Court to the District and Sessions Court.
- Whether the Supreme Court’s ruling in Celestium Financial v. Ganasekaran mandates such a transfer.
- Whether the appeal should be governed by the proviso to Section 372 CrPC.
- How the period spent before the High Court should affect the limitation period for the appeal.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 372
- Negotiable Instruments Act — s. 138
Subjects
- Section 138 NI Act
- appeal transfer
- Code of Criminal Procedure
- Section 372 proviso
- limitation period
- senior citizen
- Supreme Court precedent
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:41218
P-2-Cri-Apeal-623-2019.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 623 OF 2019
OMPRAKASH RATANLAL MALPANI
VERSUS
PANCHAKSHARI GAURISHANKAR APPA MITKARI
.…
Mr. Rajendra Deshmukh, Senior Advocate i/b Mr. Devang
Deshmukh, Advocate for Appellant
Mr. A. R. Muley h/f Mr. S. S. Solanke, Advocate for Respondent
.…
CORAM : ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J.
DATE : 07 September, 2026
PER COURT :-
1. Not on board. Upon mentioning, taken on board.
2. Learned counsel for the appellant points out that, the
instant appeal is preferred 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 learned District and
Sessions Court and hence urges that, the instant appeal be
transferred to the District Court.
1 of 2
(( 2 )) P-2-Cri-Apeal-623-2019
3. 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. Learned District and Sessions Judge to exclude the period
spent in prosecuting instant appeal before this Court while
calculating the period of limitation.
V. Considering the age of the appellant / original complainant,
the learned District and Sessions Judge shall make endeavor
to decide the appeal as early as possible by giving priority.
[ ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J. ]
SMS
2 of 2
Checking your session…