PRAVINCHANDRA MULCHANDBHAI SUTARIYAversusMEHUL JYOTINDRA JARIWALA PROPRIETOR OF TIRUPATI YARN TRADERS
- Disposal
- 97-DISPOSED AS TRANSFER TO DISTRICT/SESSION COURT N.I. ACT.
- Bench
- SANJEEV THAKER
Holding
The appeal must be transferred to the Sessions Court and treated as an appeal under the proviso of Section 372 of the CrPC/Section 413 of the BNSS.
Summary
The appellant filed an appeal under Section 378 of the CrPC and Section 419 of the BNSS against the trial court's acquittal of the respondent 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 (Cr. Misc. Apps. 12753/2019 & 12908/2019, 23‑12‑2025) and the Supreme Court judgment in Celestium Financial v. A. Gyanasekaran (2025 INSC 804), held that a complainant/victim in a Section 138 case has a specific right to appeal to the next higher court under the proviso of Section 372 of the CrPC (or Section 413 of the BNSS). Accordingly, the High Court disposed of the appeal, directing that the entire record be transferred to the appropriate Sessions Court for further hearing as an appeal under the said provisions. The Court emphasized that it had not examined the merits of the case and instructed the lower court to dispose of the matter expeditiously. The order was signed by Justice Sanjeev J. Thaker.
Issues considered
- The complainant/victim under Section 138 of the NI Act has a statutory right to appeal under the proviso of Section 372 of the CrPC/Section 413 of the BNSS.
- Whether an appeal filed before the High Court under Section 378 CrPC should be transferred to the Sessions Court as the appropriate forum.
- Whether the High Court can dispose of the appeal without addressing its merits.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973s. 372, s. 378
- Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881s. 138
Subjects
Judgment
R/CR.A/1906/2018 ORDER DATED: 24/04/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL (AGAINST ACQUITTAL) NO. 1906 of 2018
==========================================================
PRAVINCHANDRA MULCHANDBHAI SUTARIYA & ORS.
Versus
MEHUL JYOTINDRA JARIWALA PROPRIETOR OF TIRUPATI YARN
TRADERS & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
C J GOGDA(7488) for the Appellant(s) No. 1.1,1.2,1.3,1.4,1.5
UNSERVED EXPIRED (N) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
VIKAS V NAIR(7444) for the Appellant(s) No. 1.1,1.2,1.3,1.4,1.5
HL PATEL ADVOCATES(2034) for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1
MS MEGHA CHITALIYA, APP for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SANJEEV J.THAKER
Date : 24/04/2026
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) / under Section 419 of the
Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter
referred to as ‘BNSS’ 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 advocate for the parties. Learned
APP has submitted that this matter is required to be
Page 1 of 3
R/CR.A/1906/2018 ORDER DATED: 24/04/2026
transferred in view of the recent decision of this Court
passed in Criminal Misc. Application No.12753 of 2019 with
Criminal Misc. Application No.12908 of 2019.
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 / Section 413 of the BNSS to the Court which is
immediately superior in hierarchy i.e., the Sessions Court.
Therefore, the applications for leave to appeal/appeal(s) which
are pending before this Court can be disposed of with a
direction to transfer the said application/appeal(s) to the
concerned Sessions Court.
4. In view of the above, learned advocate for the
petitioner requested to transfer the appeal to the concerned
Page 2 of 3
R/CR.A/1906/2018 ORDER DATED: 24/04/2026
Sessions Court.
5. In view of the said request, this appeal is
disposed of with a direction to the Registry to transfer the
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
and issue notice to the parties. 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 for
considerable time, the learned lower Appellate Court is
required to make endeavour to dispose of the matter as
expeditiously as possible. It is clarified that this Court has
not gone into the merits of the matter at this stage.
(SANJEEV J.THAKER,J)
M.H. DAVE/83
Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: MAHESHKUMAR HASMUKHLAL DAVE(HC00193), PRINCIPAL PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 24/04/2026 14:54:23
Page 3 of 3
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.