Bombay High Court

GORAKH SHIVA KAMBALEversusAJIT SADASHIV MALI AND ANR.

Disposal: Disposed Off
Bench: RANJITSINHA RAJA BHONSALE

Holding

The High Court ordered the transfer of the appeal to the District and Sessions Court, to be treated as an appeal under Section 372 CrPC, and excluded the time spent on the leave application from the limitation period.

Summary

The applicant, Gorakh Shiva Kambale, filed a leave to appeal application challenging his acquittal under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, and sought to have the appeal transferred to the District and Sessions Court in light of the Supreme Court’s decision in M/s. Celestium Financial v. Ganasekaran (2025). The High Court considered whether the Supreme Court precedent mandated such a transfer and whether the time spent filing the leave application should be excluded from the limitation period. Relying on the Supreme Court’s observations, the Court ordered the matter to be transferred to the appropriate District Court, to be treated as an appeal under the proviso to Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and directed that the period spent before the High Court not count towards limitation. The application was consequently disposed of with the transfer order.

Issues considered

Whether a leave to appeal against an acquittal under Section 138 NI Act can be transferred to the District and Sessions Court following the Supreme Court’s decision in Celestium Financial v. Ganasekaran.
Whether the period spent prosecuting the leave application before the High Court should be excluded when calculating the limitation period for the appeal.

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 372
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — s. 138

Subjects

Section 138 NI Act
appeal transfer
Section 372 CrPC
limitation period
Supreme Court precedent
leave to appeal

Judgment

                                              1
                                                        906-ALP(ST)-218-2019 (CR).DOC


                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                            CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
                          CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

              APPLN FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL(PVT.) (STAMP) NO. 218 OF 2019

         Gorakh Shiva Kambale                                    …...Applicant
               VERSUS
         Ajit Sadashiv Mali And Anr.                           …...Respondents


                                       WITH
                  CR. APPLICATION IN APPLICATION NO. 729 OF 2019
                                        IN
                APPLN FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL(PVT.)ST NO. 218 OF 2019

         Gorakh Shiva Kambale                                  …........Applicant
               VERSUS
         Ajit Sadashiv Mali And Anr.                        ….......Respondents

                                        -----
         Mr. Kedar Lad a/w Ms. Indrayani Patil, for Applicant.
         Mr. S. S. Chaudhari, APP, for the Respondent-State.
                                            -----

                            CORAM      :   RANJITSINHA RAJA BHONSALE, J.
                            DATE       :   8th MAY, 2026.
         P.C.

         1.          Heard learned counsel for the Applicant and learned APP for

         Respondent No.2 - State.

         2.          Learned counsel for the Applicant points out that, the

         instant application has been preferred seeking leave to file appeal

         against the order of acquittal from offence under Section 138 of the

         Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. He prays that, now, in view of the

Shantanu S. Dhudum
                                                2
                                                           906-ALP(ST)-218-2019 (CR).DOC


         decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in M/s. Celestium Financial

         Vs. Ganasekaran ETC., reported in [(2025) SCC OnLine SC 1320], he

         would contest the appeal before the learned District and Sessions

         Court and hence urges that, the same be transferred to the District

         Court.

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

                                            ORDER

                     (i)        The present proceeding 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 concerned 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 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 M/s. Celestium Financial

                     (supra).



Shantanu S. Dhudum
                                                3
                                                            906-ALP(ST)-218-2019 (CR).DOC


                     (iv)    Learned District and Sessions Judge to exclude

                     the period spent in prosecuting instant leave application

                     before this Court while calculating the period of limitation.

          4.         In view of the above, the application stands disposed of.

          5.         All pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.



                                             ( RANJITSINHA RAJA BHONSALE, J.)




Shantanu S. Dhudum

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…