Created byFuzzy Cloud

High Court of Gujarat

GOVINDBHAI LAKHUBHAI PATEL (GOTHI)versusSTATE OF GUJARAT

Disposal
97-DISPOSED AS TRANSFER TO DISTRICT/SESSION COURT N.I. ACT.

Holding

The appeal is to be transferred to the Sessions Court as the complainant has a statutory right to appeal under the proviso of Section 372 of the CrPC.

Summary

The appellant, Govindbhai Lakhubhai Patel, filed an appeal under Section 378 of the CrPC against the trial court’s acquittal on a charge under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The High Court, referencing its recent decision in Shivsinh Ganpatsinh Solanki v. State of Gujarat (Criminal Miscellaneous Application Nos. 12753/2019 & 12908/2019) and the Supreme Court’s ruling in M/s Celestium Financial v. A. Gyanasekaran (2025 INSC 804), held that a complainant has a specific right to appeal under the proviso of Section 372 of the CrPC to the Sessions Court. Accordingly, the High Court disposed of the appeal by directing its transfer to the appropriate Sessions Court, ordering the registry to send the complete record, and urging the lower court to dispose of the matter expeditiously. No merits of the case were examined at this stage.

Issues considered

  • The complainant’s right to appeal an acquittal under Section 138 NI Act via the proviso of Section 372 CrPC to the Sessions Court
  • Whether the High Court should transfer the pending appeal to the Sessions Court

Legislation cited

Subjects

Acquittal appealSection 138 NI ActSection 372 CrPCTransfer of appealJurisdictionSessions CourtCriminal procedure

Judgment

     R/CR.A/1570/2012                                     ORDER DATED: 27/01/2026




            IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                        R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1570 of 2012

==========================================================
                   GOVINDBHAI LAKHUBHAI PATEL (GOTHI)
                                 Versus
                        STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR JIGAR G GADHAVI(5613) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR N P CHAUDHARY(3980) for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 2
MR TUSHAR CHAUDHARY(5316) for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 2
MS MEGHA CHITALIYA, APP for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1
RULE SERVED for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 2
==========================================================

 CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SANJEEV J.THAKER

                                 Date : 27/01/2026

                                  ORAL ORDER


1.             This is an acquittal appeal filed under Section 378

of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred

to as `the Code’ for short) by the complainant against the

judgment and order impugned passed by the learned trial

Court, whereby the learned trial Court had acquitted the

respondent/s/accused of the charge under Section 138 of the
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as

the `NI Act’ for short).



2.             Heard learned advocates for the parties. Learned

APP     has     submitted       that    this     matter   is   required       to    be

transferred in view of the recent decision of this Court

passed in Criminal Miscellaneous Application Nos. 12753 of

2019 with 12908 of 2019.



                                       Page 1 of 3
     R/CR.A/1570/2012                                               ORDER DATED: 27/01/2026




3.               Before entering into the merits of this case, this

Court deems it proper to refer to the latest decision rendered

by this Court in the case of Shivsinh Ganpatsinh Solanki V/s

State      of    Gujarat         &         Anr.     being    Criminal        Miscellaneous
Application Nos. 12753 of 2019 with 12908 of 2019 on
23.12.2025, wherein, after considering the various judgments
of   the        Hon’ble        Supreme             Court,    more      particularly,          the

judgment         in     the     matter        of     M/s    Celestium       Financial          V/s
A.Gyanasekaran                etc.        reported     in    2025      INSC       804,        has

observed and held that the Complainant, in a complaint

under Section 138 of the N.I. Act, being a Victim, has a

specific right to appeal under proviso of Section 372 of the

Code to the Court which is immediately superior in hierarchy

i.e., the Sessions Court. Therefore, the applications for leave

to appeal/appeals which are pending before this Court can be

disposed         of     with          a     direction       to   transfer         the         said

application/appeal to the concerned Sessions Court.


4.               In view of the above, learned advocate for the

petitioner requested to transfer the appeal to the concerned

Sessions Court.


5.               In     view         of    the     said     request,     this     appeal        is

disposed of with a direction to the Registry to transfer the



                                              Page 2 of 3
             R/CR.A/1570/2012                                                                 ORDER DATED: 27/01/2026




    appeal             to       the        concerned                Sessions              Court.           After           it      is

    transferred to the concerned Sessions Court, it has to be

    treated as an Appeal under the proviso under Section 372 of

    the Code                 (Section 413 of BNSS) and numbered accordingly.

    The Registry is directed to transfer the entire record of the

    case, including the certified copies of the order impugned and

    record           &       proceedings,                if     lying         with         this        Court,           to      the

    concerned lower Appellate Court, forthwith.


    6.                      Considering               that         the       matter            has        been         pending

    since the year 2012, the learned lower Appellate Court is

    required to make endeavour to dispose of the matter as

    expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six

    months from the date of receipt of the matter.



    7.                      It is clarified that this Court has not gone into
    the merits of the matter at this stage.


                                                                                           (SANJEEV J.THAKER,J)
    SRILATHA



Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: SRILATHA VENKATARAO UPADHYAYULA(HC00185), PRINCIPAL PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 27/01/2026 17:35:15




                                                              Page 3 of 3


Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Try "Acquittal appeal"Sign in to search

For a digitally signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's own website. Only the court can issue one.