32-ALP-179-2024 @.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL (PVT.) NO. 179 OF 2024 Securities And Exchange Of India- ...Applicant Versus Jayesh Himatlal Mehta ...Respondent **** Mr. Ahmed Padela i/b The Law Point for the Applicant. Ms. Dhanlaxmi Krishnaaiyar APP for Respondent/State. **** CORAM : M.M. SATHAYE, J. DATE : 10th SEPTEMBER, 2026 P.C. : 1. Heard learned Counsel for the Applicant/SEBI. Application is filed seeking leave to file appeal against an order dated 30.03.2024 passed in SEBI Special Case No. 33/2019 acquitting the Respondent No.1 from offence punishable under Section 24(2) of Security and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992. 2. Learned Counsel for the Applicant has invited the Court’s attention to order dated 03.12.2025 passed by this Court, which reads as under. “1) Heard Mr. Jha, the learned counsel appearing for the Applicant and perused the order of acquittal. 2) The learned Sessions Judge has acquitted the accused primarily on the ground that the Applicant-Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) could not prove service of adjudication order on the accused. 3) It appears that SEBI had placed on record and proved in evidence postal acknowledgment cards to demonstrate service of Sneha Chavan 1 SNEHA NITIN CHAVAN Digitally signed by SNEHA NITIN CHAVAN Date: 2026.09.10 19:42:58 +0530 32-ALP-179-2024 @.doc adjudication order on the accused. The Sessions Court has ignored the acknowledgment and has unnecessarily concentrated on the aspect of non-production of postal receipt for the purpose of drawal of presumption under Section 27 of the General Clauses Act, 1897. The finding of non-production of postal receipt also appears to be perverse in view of the fact that SEBI had produced speed post booking list, by which bulk postal booking was made by the SEBI. Thus, apparently there is postal receipt as well as acknowledgment on the record showing due service of the adjudication order on the accused. Once the postal acknowledgment receipt itself is proved, there is no occasion for drawal of any presumption under Section 27 of the General Clauses Act. It is only in case where acknowledgment cannot be produced that one may rely upon a mere postal receipt for the purpose of drawal of presumption under Section 27 of the General Clauses Act. Prima facie order of acquittal appears to be erroneous. 4) Issue notice to Respondent No.1, returnable on 13 January 2026” 3. Office note indicates that Respondent is duly served and an Advocate is engaged whose name is appearing on the cause list. However, none appeared for Respondent No.1. 4. I have perused the impugned order as well as earlier order passed by this Court. 5. In addition, learned Counsel for the Applicant has invited the Court’s attention to the acknowledgments produced on record from postal authorities, which according to the Applicant sufficiently establish service of demand for penalties and reminder sent thereafter. Sneha Chavan 2 32-ALP-179-2024 @.doc 6. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, case for leave is made out. Application is allowed. Applicant is permitted to file appeal challenging the order of acquittal dated 30.03.2024. (M.M. SATHAYE, J.) Sneha Chavan 3