Pico Capital Private LimitedversusVinod Kumar Chaturvedi

Shivgan                                      1-IA-2891-2026-J.docx



          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
             INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 2891 OF 2026
                              IN
                WRIT PETITION NO. 3189 OF 2014


Pico Capital Private Limited
A Limited Company registered under
The Companies Act Previously knows as
M/s. Mode Export Private Limited
Through its Authorised Signatory
Mr Jamil Akhtar
Having its Registered Office at
22(1), Bombay Cotton Mills Compound,
Dattaram Ladh Path, Kalachowky,
Mumbai-400 033.                                 …Applicant/Ori.
                                                Respondent No.1.
          Versus
1. Vinod Kumar Chaturvedi
   Aged: Occu: Managing Director of
   M/s. Usher Agro Limited
   Residing at 1402, La-Saren Apts.
   Above HDFC Bank Limited,
   J.P. Road, Andheri (West),
   Mumbai-400 058.                       ….Respondent
                                         No.1/Ori. Petitioner
2. M/s. Swajay Finance Private Limited
   Having its address at 22, B.V. Patel,
   Rani Sati Road, Near Laxmi Narayan
   Temple, Malad (East),
   Mumbai-400 067.
3. State of Maharashtra                  ...Respondents/Ori.
   Through APP                           Respondent Nos.2
                                         & 3.

      Mr Mutahar Khan, with Kavisha Shah, Harshil Gandhi
          and Naiana Boraste i/b India Law Alliance , for


                               Page 1 of 8
                          nd
                        22 September 2026
Shivgan                                              1-IA-2891-2026-J.docx



           Applicant in IA.
      Mr Yashpal Thakur, with Mukund Pandya, Dhruv Bhinde,
           for Respondent No.1.


                 CORAM                             DR. NEELA GOKHALE, J.
                 RESERVED ON:                      22ndSEPTEMBER 2026
                                                   (IN CHAMBERS)
                 PRONOUNCED ON:                    30thSEPTEMBER 2026

JUDGMENT:-

1.        By this application, the Applicant seeks recall and

setting aside of the ex-parte Order dated 18th September

2025, passed by this Court in Criminal Writ Petition No. 3189

of 2014, by which the issue process order dated 16 th

September 2013, passed against Respondent No.1 herein, by

the Metropolitan Magistrate, 7th Court, Dadar, Mumbai in

Criminal Complaint No. 1675/SS/2013, was quashed and set

aside.

2.        The brief facts of the case are as follows:

3.1. The          Applicant          (Original        Respondent             No.1/

Complainant) is a private limited company incorporated and

registered under the Companies Act. Respondent No.1

(Original Petitioner) is the Managing Director of Usher Agro


                                     Page 2 of 8
                                nd
                              22 September 2026
Shivgan                                             1-IA-2891-2026-J.docx



Limited, a company incorporated and registered under the

Companies Act; Respondent No.2-M/s Swajay Finance Pvt.

Ltd.      (Original   Respondent            No.2)   is     also   a    company

incorporated and registered under the Companies Act; and

Respondent No.3 is the State of Maharashtra.

3.2. The Applicant filed a complaint against the Respondents

herein and other Directors of Respondent No.2-Company

under Sections 138 and 141 of the Negotiable Instruments

Act, 1881 (‘NI Act’) before the Metropolitan Magistrate, 7th

Court, Bhoiwada, Mumbai, alleging that the Respondent No.1,

being the CMD of Usher Agro Limited, was the main person

responsible for inducing the Applicant for making Inter

Corporate Deposit of Rs.150 Lakhs in the Respondent No.1’s

front      company     i.e.,      Respondent             No.2,    by    making

representations to the Applicant that the Respondent No.1

would be personally liable to repay the amount so advanced

by the Applicant and by also pledging the shares of Usher

Agro Limited to the Applicant as a guarantee/security.




                                      Page 3 of 8
                                 nd
                               22 September 2026
Shivgan                                        1-IA-2891-2026-J.docx



3.3. The Metropolitan Magistrate, vide its order dated 16th

December 2013, issued process against the Respondents and

other accused. The Respondent No. 1 assailed the said order

before this Court by way of the aforesaid writ petition.

3.4. By order dated 18th September 2025, this Court, after

noting the Applicant’s absence on multiple dates of hearing

and numerous adjournments sought by the parties, and after

evaluating the merits of the case, quashed and set aside the

issue process order passed by the Metropolitan Magistrate. It

is this order which is sought to be recalled in the present

application.

3.        Mr Mutahar Khan, learned Counsel, appeared for the

Applicant and Mr Yashpal Thakur, learned Counsel, appeared

for Respondent No.1

4.        Mr Khan submitted that the Applicant appeared and

contested the proceedings from 2014, however, due to bona

fide reasons, including a change in advocate and the inability

of the new advocate to formally appear for want of NOC from

previous advocate, there was no effective representation on


                                 Page 4 of 8
                            nd
                          22 September 2026
Shivgan                                                  1-IA-2891-2026-J.docx



behalf of the Applicant when the matter was taken up for final

hearing. The Applicant had no knowledge of the matter being

circulated or listed.

5.        He further submitted that the impugned Order should

be recalled, as it was passed without affording the Applicant

an opportunity to present his case. He also submitted that the

High Court is vested with the power to recall an order passed

in circumstances leading to procedural irregularity, denial of

fair hearing, violation of principles of natural justice, or

resulting in miscarriage of justice, and that the present case

warrants exercise of such power. He relied on the decisions of

the Supreme Court in Vishal Agarwal vs State of Uttar

Pradesh and Another1 and Mahavir alias Avnish vs State of

Madhya Pradesh2. He thus prayed that the application be

allowed.

6.        Mr Thakur placed on record Affidavit-in-Reply dated

22nd September 2026 on behalf of Respondent No.1. He

submitted that the present recall application was filed after an
1
          (2011) 14 SCC 813
2
          2026 SCC OnLine SC 1747




                                           Page 5 of 8
                                      nd
                                    22 September 2026
Shivgan                                            1-IA-2891-2026-J.docx



inordinate delay of almost 9 months without explaining the

sufficient cause. He further submitted that the High Court

cannot exercise its inherent power under Section 482 of the

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (‘CrPC’) in view of the

express bar provided under Section 362 of the CrPC.                        He

submitted that an order passed on merits cannot be recalled

and that Section 362 of the CrPC is confined to correcting

clerical and arithmetical errors. He relied on the decisions of

the Supreme Court in the matters of Sooraj Devi vs Pyare Lal

and Ors.3, Simrikhia vs Dolley Mukherjee and Chhabi

Mukharjee and Ors.4,Mohammed Zakir vs Shabana and Ors.5,

Ajay Singh and Ors. vs State of Chhattisgarh and Ors. 6 and on

the decision of the Allahabad High Court in the matter of Shiv

Poojan Upadhyay and Ors. vs State of U.P. and Ors. 7. He thus

prayed that the application be dismissed.

7.        Heard the learned counsel appearing for the respective

parties and perused the record with their assistance.
3
          AIR 1981 SC 736
4
          (1990) 2 SCC 437
5
          (2018) 15 SCC 316
6
          (2017) 3 SCC 330
7
          2019 (3) ALJ 407




                                     Page 6 of 8
                                nd
                              22 September 2026
Shivgan                                         1-IA-2891-2026-J.docx



8.        A plain reading of the Order sought to be recalled

reveals that the Order is passed on the merits of the matter.

This Court has considered the averments made in the

Complaint of the Applicant as well as the documents on

record. In doing so, the Court examined and applied the

provisions of Sections 138 and 141 of the Negotiable

Instruments Act, 1881, in the context of the facts of the case.

Only after carefully perusing the facts and applying the

relevant provisions of law, this Court passed the impugned

Order.

9.        This Court has also recorded the Applicant's absence on

several dates. It may be that on some additional dates, both

the parties, by consent, took adjournments; however, it cannot

be denied that the Applicant sought adjournments on three

occasions, namely 23rd February 2016; 27th June 2016; and 8th

August 2016. On subsequent dates, it appears that the matter

was adjourned for paucity of court time or on joint request.

Fact remains, however, that the Applicant was not represented

on the date on which the matter was heard and the Order



                                  Page 7 of 8
                             nd
                           22 September 2026
Shivgan                                           1-IA-2891-2026-J.docx



came to be passed. The case is of the year 2014. There is no

infirmity in the Order, and no cogent reason is made out

justifying recall of the said Order.

10.       In view of the aforesaid, the interim application is

dismissed.




                                               (DR. NEELA GOKHALE, J)

          Digitally
          signed by
          SHAMBHAVI
SHAMBHAVI NILESH
NILESH    SHIVGAN
SHIVGAN   Date:
          2026.09.30
          18:38:59
          +0530




                                 Page 8 of 8
                            nd
                          22 September 2026