R/CR.MA/23862/2024 ORDER DATED: 18/07/2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL) NO. 23862 of 2024 In F/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 32239 of 2024 ========================================================== DALAL NAMRATA NAGINBHAI Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR. ========================================================== Appearance: MR ANIRUDH N SUCHAK(10768) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MS. C.M. SHAH, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE S.V. PINTO Date : 18/07/2025 ORAL ORDER 1. The present application is filed by the applicant – original complainant seeking leave to file an appeal against the judgement and order dated 29.02.2024 passed by the learned 2nd Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Surat (hereinafter referred to as the “learned Trial Court”) in Criminal Case No. 61244/2022, whereby, the learned Trial Court was pleased to acquit the accused from the offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to “the NI Act” for short). 2. Heard learned advocate Mr. Anirudh Suchak for the R/CR.MA/23862/2024 ORDER DATED: 18/07/2025 applicant and learned APP Ms. C.M. Shah for the respondent State. 3. Learned advocate Mr. Anirudh Suchak for the applicant submits that the applicant is doing the business of beauty parlour in the name and style of Pearl Beauty Care at Surat and the respondent no. 2 is the proprietor of Different Shopping who came into contact with the applicant through one Nileshbhai Babubhai Patel. The respondent no. 2 was in need of some finance for his business and had demanded for an amount of Rs. 2,00,000/- from the applicant but as the applicant had an amount of Rs. 1,70,000/-, she had given the same as a hand loan to the respondent no. 2. The respondent no. 2 had issued cheque no. 000076 dated 20.05.2022 for Rs. 1,70,000/- from his account with Kotak Mahindra Bank, Manav Mandir Branch, Navsari. The cheque was deposited by the applicant in her account with Bank of Baroda, Limbayat Branch, Surat but the cheque returned unpaid with the endorsement “Funds Insufficient”. The demand statutory notice was given which was duly served to the R/CR.MA/23862/2024 ORDER DATED: 18/07/2025 respondent no. 2 but the respondent no. 2 did not repay the amount within the stipulated period and hence, the applicant filed the complaint under Section 138 of the NI Act before the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Surat which came to be registered as Criminal Case No. 61244/2022. The respondent no. 2 was duly served with the summons and he appeared before the learned Trial Court and after his plea was recorded, the applicant produced the oral and documentary evidence on record. The applicant stepped into the witness box and deposed on oath at Exh. 4 and also examined witness Nileshbhai Babubhai Patel at Exh. 29 and produced 8 documentary evidence in support of his case. Learned advocate submits that it was the case of the applicant that the amount has been paid through Nileshbhai Babubhai Patel and hence, produced the oral evidence of Nileshbhai Babubhai Patel to prove the case. After the evidence of the applicant was taken, the respondent no. 2 did not step into the witness box and did not examine any witnesses but simply took a defence that a false case has been filed against him and he is not known to R/CR.MA/23862/2024 ORDER DATED: 18/07/2025 the applicant. After the arguments of learned advocates for both the parties were heard, the learned Trial Court was pleased to pass the impugned judgement and order of acquittal. Learned advocate submits that it was the case of the applicant that the amount has been paid through witness Nileshbhai Babubhai Patel and as the applicant is running a beauty parlour and she had come into contact with the respondent no. 2 through the said Nileshbhai Babubhai Patel, she had proved the same from the evidence of witness. Learned advocate submits that the learned Trial Court has not appreciated the evidence of Nileshbhai Babubhai Patel in proper perspective and even though the applicant had proved the legally enforceable debt, the same has not been considered. Learned advocate submits that the applicant has a good case on merits and the application seeking leave to appeal must be granted. 4. Learned APP Ms. C.M. Shah for the respondent State has submitted that the learned Trial Court has considered all the documents produced by the applicant and has also considered the evidence and has passed the impugned order R/CR.MA/23862/2024 ORDER DATED: 18/07/2025 of acquittal considering the settled principles of law and hence, the leave to appeal may not be granted. 5. Considering the submissions of learned advocate for the applicant as also on perusal of the paper book on record and the judgement and order of acquittal, prima facie, it appears that the documents have not been properly appreciated in proper perspective. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case in the considered opinion of this Court the application deserves to be considered. Consequently, the application seeking leave to appeal is granted and disposed off accordingly. (S. V. PINTO,J) VASIM S. SAIYED Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge. Digitally signed by: VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902), PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 18/07/2025 15:29:49