Bombay High Court
T.C.I. FINANCE LTD.versusM/S. SALSTAR FOODS AND BEVERAGES. LTD. AND ORS.
- Decided
- Disposal
- Dismissed
Holding
The appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution.
Summary
T.C.I. Finance Ltd. appealed against the order of the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate who had dismissed its complaint and acquitted M/s. Salstar Foods & Beverages Ltd. and others under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for want of prosecution. The appeal, filed in 2007, remained pending for many years with no steps taken to serve the respondents. The court observed that the appellants appeared uninterested in pursuing the matter. Consequently, the High Court dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution. The dismissal upheld the magistrate's earlier order of acquittal.
Issues considered
- Whether an appeal can be dismissed for want of prosecution due to prolonged inactivity by the appellant
- Whether the magistrate's dismissal of the complaint under Section 138 NI Act was maintainable
Legislation cited
- Negotiable Instruments Act — s. 138
Subjects
- Section 138
- Negotiable Instruments Act
- want of prosecution
- criminal appeal
- dismissal
Judgment
Digitally
signed by
DINESH
DINESH SADANAND 28-appeal-823-2007.odt
SADANAND SHERLA
SHERLA Date:
2026.09.07
19:21:10
+0530
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 823 OF 2007
T.C.I. Finance Ltd. …Appellants
V/s.
M/s. Salstar Foods & Beverages Ltd.
and Ors. ...Respondents.
…………..
None for the Appellants.
Mrs. S.S. Kaushik, APP for the Respondent/State.
…………..
CORAM : N.R. BORKAR, J.
DATE : 7.9.2026.
P.C. :
1. This appeal takes exception to the order dated 21.12.2001
passed by the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate,
37th Court, Esplanade, Mumbai in C.C.No.215/S/1997.
2. By the impugned order, the learned Magistrate has
dismissed the complaint filed by the present appellants for want of
prosecution and acquitted respondent Nos.1 to 3 herein for the
offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable
Instruments Act.
3. This appeal is pending since 2007 and no steps are taken to
serve respondent Nos.1 to 3. It appears that the appellants are not
interested in prosecuting the present appeal. The Appeal is
dismissed for want of prosecution.
[N.R.BORKAR, J.]
Dinesh S. Sherla 1/1
Checking your session…