Bombay High Court

PRADIP S/O. VISHWANATH WAGHMAREversusSADANAND S/O. DAYANAND UNAWANE

Disposal: Transfer to other court

Holding

The appeal is to be transferred to the District and Sessions Court and treated as an appeal under the proviso to Section 372 of the CrPC, with the period spent before this Court excluded for limitation purposes.

Summary

The appellant Pradip appealed against his acquittal under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, seeking to have the appeal transferred from the High Court to the District and Sessions Court. He relied on the Supreme Court’s decision in Celestium Financial v. Ganasekaran (2025) to argue that the appeal should be heard as an appeal under the proviso to Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The High Court, after considering the submission, ordered that the matter be transferred to the appropriate District and Sessions Court. The transferred court is directed to register the appeal, issue notices, and proceed in accordance with law, treating it as an appeal under Section 372. Additionally, the court directed that the time spent prosecuting the appeal before the High Court be excluded when calculating the limitation period.

Issues considered

Whether an appeal against an order of acquittal under Section 138 NI Act can be transferred to a District and Sessions Court in view of the Supreme Court’s decision in Celestium Financial v. Ganasekaran.
Whether the period spent before the High Court should be excluded for the purpose of limitation under the proviso to Section 372 CrPC.

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 372
Negotiable Instruments Act — s. 138

Subjects

Section 138 NI Act
appeal transfer
Section 372 CrPC
limitation period
acquittal
High Court order
criminal procedure

Judgment

                                                   945-Cri-Apeal-746-2022.odt




         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
                    BENCH AT AURANGABAD

             945 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 746 OF 2022

            PRADIP S/O. VISHWANATH WAGHMARE
                             VERSUS
             SADANAND S/O. DAYANAND UNAWANE
                                 .…
Mr. Pradip S. Jadhav h/f Mr. V. P. Latange, Advocate for Appellant
Mr. Sandip R. Andhale, Advocate for Respondent
                                 .…

                     CORAM : ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J.

                        DATE : 03 September, 2026
PER COURT :-


1.           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.


2.           In view of the above, the following order is passed :



                                                                       1 of 2
                                    (( 2 ))         945-Cri-Apeal-746-2022




                                 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.




                                      [ ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J. ]

SMS




                                                                             2 of 2

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…