JAYESHBHAI BACHUBHAI PATELversusSTATE OF GUJARAT
- Disposal
- 27-WITHDRAWN @ ADM.STAGE
- Bench
- SANJEEV THAKER
Holding
The Court permitted withdrawal of the leave‑to‑appeal application and held that the time spent on it shall not be counted as delay for filing the appropriate appeal under Section 372 CrPC.
Summary
The complainant filed an application under Section 378(4) of the CrPC seeking leave to appeal against the trial court's acquittal of the accused under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. After a recent decision (Shivsinh Ganpatsinh Solanki v. State of Gujarat) clarifying a victim's right to appeal under the proviso to Section 372 of the CrPC (Section 413 of the BNSS), the applicant sought to withdraw the application. The High Court granted permission to withdraw, disposed of the application as withdrawn, and allowed the applicant four months to file the appropriate appeal in the Sessions Court, stating that the time spent on the present application would not count as delay. The court also ordered the record to be remitted to the concerned court and clarified that it had not examined the merits of the original case. The order essentially facilitates the victim's procedural right to appeal without prejudice.
Issues considered
- The applicability of the recent Supreme Court‑derived rule allowing a victim to appeal under the proviso to Section 372 CrPC.
- Whether the period spent filing the leave‑to‑appeal application can be excluded from the limitation period for filing the proper appeal.
- The permissibility of withdrawing the leave‑to‑appeal application in light of the new precedent.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973s. 372, s. 378(4)
- Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881s. 138
Subjects
Judgment
R/CR.MA/23553/2025 ORDER DATED: 29/01/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL) NO. 23553
of 2025
In
F/CRIMINAL APPEAL/43122/2025
With
F/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 43122 of 2025
================================================================
JAYESHBHAI BACHUBHAI PATEL
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
================================================================
Appearance:
MR PADMRAJ K JADEJA(2095) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS SHRUTI PATHAK, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
================================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SANJEEV J.THAKER
Date : 29/01/2026
ORAL ORDER
1. This application is filed under Section 378(4) of the
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (“Code or CrPC”) by the
Complainant seeking leave to appeal to challenge the
judgment and order impugned passed by the learned trial
Court, whereby the Ld. Trial Court had acquitted the
Respondent/s-Accused of charge under Section 138 of the
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as
the `NI Act’ for short).
2. Learned advocate for the appellant seeks permission to
withdraw this application, in view of 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
Page 1 of 3
R/CR.MA/23553/2025 ORDER DATED: 29/01/2026
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 BNSS) to the Court which is
immediately superior in hierarchy i.e., the Sessions Court,
with a liberty to file appropriate appeal under Section 372 of
the Code (Section 413 of BNSS) and prayed that the period
that may be consumed in filing the present appeal, may not
be counted as delay in filing such appeal before the
concerned Court.
3. Permission as prayed for is granted. The present
application as well as the connected appeal are disposed of
as withdrawn, with a liberty to file appropriate appeal/s
before the concerned Court, within a period of four months
from the date of this order. Record and proceedings, if lying
with this Court, be remitted back to the concerned Court
forthwith.
4. It is clarified that the period that may be consumed in
filing the present appeal may not be counted as delay in
filing such appeal before the concerned Court. Moreover, the
Page 2 of 3
R/CR.MA/23553/2025 ORDER DATED: 29/01/2026
certified copy of the impugned judgment, be handed over to
the applicant/appellant, as per Rules, if asked for. It is open
for the parties to agitate all the grievance before the
concerned Court afresh. It is clarified that this Court has not
gone into the merits of the matter.
(SANJEEV J.THAKER,J)
Manoj Kumar Rai
Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: MANOJKUMAR RAI(HC01072), PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 29/01/2026 14:16:41
Page 3 of 3
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.