SHIRDI NAGARI SAHAKARI PATSANSTHA THROUGH ITS EMPLOYEE VISHNU RAMRAO THOMBREversusBHAGWAN RAMAN PATIL

2026:BHC-AUG:11683


                                                                         Appln-986-2026
                                                  -1-

                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                    BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                                CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 986 OF 2026
                                                IN
                                  CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 803 OF 2024

                 Shirdi Nagari Sahakari Patasanstha
                 Through Its Employee
                 Shri Vishnu Ramrao Thombre
                 Age : 62 Years : Occu : Service,
                 R/o : Shirdi, Taluka : Rahata,
                 District : Ahmednagar.                            … Applicant
                                                                   [complainant]
                       Versus

                 Shri Bhagwan s/o Raman Patil
                 Age : Major, Occu : Agriculture,
                 R/o : Nimgaonwadi, At Post Shirdi,
                 Taluka : Rahata, District : Ahmednagar.           … Respondent
                                                                   [Accused]
                                                 …..
                 Mrs. Rashmi S. Kulkarni h/f Mr. Sanket S. Kulkarni, Advocate for the
                 Applicant.
                 Mr. Avinash Barhate Patil, Advocate for the Respondent (through
                 video conference)
                                                 .....

                                          CORAM :       ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J.
                                          Reserved on        : 17.03.2026
                                          Pronounced on      : 18.03.2026

                 ORDER :


                 1.    Present application is for grant of stay to the effect, operation

                 and execution of clause (4) of judgment and order dated 06.10.2023

                 passed by learned 2nd Judicial Magistrate F.C., Rahata in S.C.C. No.

                 1197 of 2018.
                                                         Appln-986-2026
                                  -2-




2.    Learned counsel pointed out that, applicant is a bank/a

financial institution involved in the business of extending loans. That,

applicant bank had instituted proceedings under Section 138 of the

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 [NI Act] bearing S.C.C. No. 1197 of

2018 against present respondent. That, respondent had borrowed

loan and had committed the offence under Section 138 of the NI Act.

That, during pendency of trial, matter was referred to Lok Adalat for

amicable settlement and in consequence to it, two cheques were

issued by accused but the same got dishonored. That, unfortunately

proceedings instituted by the applicant under Section 138 of NI Act

ended up in acquittal, against which leave to file appeal was preferred

before this Court and that this Court was please to grant leave by

order 27.08.2024. Learned counsel further pointed out that, matter is

already admitted in September 2024 and record and proceedings are

called and are still awaited.



3.    However, according to learned counsel, in spite of knowledge

to the above extent, accused instituted proceedings under Section 421

of Cr.P.C vide Criminal Misc. Application No. 383 of 2024. That, 20%

of the cheque amount was already credited to the account of

respondent-accused. That, however, present respondent-original
                                                        Appln-986-2026
                                  -3-

accused, vide above proceedings, has prayed for initiating arrest

proceedings before the trial court and therefore there is strong

apprehension of any order being passed to that extent by the learned

trial court which is seized with the matter which is listed on 23 rd of

this month, and hence she urges for grant of above prayers.



4.    Learned counsel for respondent justifies the initiation of

proceedings before trial court by invoking Section 421 of Cr.P.C.



5.    After considering the above submissions of each side and on

going through the papers, it does emerge that the proceedings under

Section 138 of the NI Act were instituted by present applicant vide

S.C.C. 1197 of 2018. Present respondent-original accused therein

seems to be acquitted by the learned trial court by judgment and

order dated 06.10.2023 against which, after filing leave to file appeal

and succeeding in the same, appeal against acquittal is shown to be

admitted and record and proceedings is called and the same seems to

be awaited.



6.    In appears that, subsequent to that, i.e. on 07.12.2024, Cri.

Misc. Application No. 383 of 2024 has been pressed into service by

the present respondent and copy of the same is also annexed herewith
                                                           Appln-986-2026
                                   -4-

which shows that in said application, Section 421 of Cr.P.C. is

invoked which deals with procedure for recovery of fines. For ready

reference, the said provision is reproduced as under.



     “421. Warrant for levy of fine. -When an offender has been
     sentenced to pay a fine, the Court passing the sentence
     may take action for the recovery of the fine in either or
     both of the following ways, that is to say, it may-


     (a) issue a warrant for the levy of the amount by
     attachment and sale of any movable property belonging to
     the offender;


     (b) issue a warrant to the Collector of the district,
     authorising him to realise the amount as arrears of land
     revenue from the movable or immovable property, or both
     of the defaulter:


     Provided that, if the sentence directs that in default of
     payment of the fine, the offender shall be imprisoned, and
     if such offender has undergone the whole of such
     imprisonment in default, no Court shall issue such warrant
     unless, for special reasons to be recorded in writing, it
     considers it necessary so to do, or unless it has made an
     order for the payment of expenses or compensation out of
     the fine under section 357.
                                                          Appln-986-2026
                                   -5-

     (2) The State Government may make rules regulating the
     manner in which warrants under clause (a) of sub-section
     (1) are to be executed, and for the summary determination
     of any claims made by any person other than the offender
     in respect of any property attached in execution of such
     warrant.


     (3) Where the Court issues a warrant to the Collector
     under clause (b) of sub-section (1), the Collector shall
     realise the amount in accordance with the law relating to
     recovery of arrears of land revenue, as if such warrant were
     a certificate issued under such law:


     Provided that no such warrant shall be executed by the
     arrest or detention in prison of the offender.”



7.    The above provision is taken recourse to when fine is imposed

as a part of sentence or when compensation or maintenance is

ordered to be paid and recoverable as a fine. Indeed, procedure of

issuing warrant is permissible. However, here, aggrieved by the order

of acquittal, after obtaining leave, appeal is preferred and the same is

sub judice. Going by the prayer in Criminal Misc. Application No.

383 , it is abundantly clear that respondent is urging for issuing arrest

warrant. Next date before the trial court is said to be 23.03.2026.

Cause-list is placed on record. From 19.03.2026 till 22.03.2026, this
                                                        Appln-986-2026
                                  -6-

court would not function. Resultantly, taking the above submissions

and counter submissions into consideration, this court is inclined to

grant protection as prayed. Hence, following order :


                               ORDER

I.    Application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (A).


II.   Application is accordingly disposed off.



                                          [ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J.]



vre