14 ALP 366-19.DOC IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL NO. 366 OF 2019 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 69 OF 2019 IN APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL NO. 366 OF 2019 M/s. Sulphur Mills Ltd. ...Appellant Versus Kamireddy Murali Reddy & Anr. ...Respondents _______ Mr. Sanjeev Sawant a/w. Abhishek Deshmukh and Bhakti Wast for Appellant. Mr. Avinash Kamkhedkar, APP for the State. _______ CORAM: AARTI SATHE, J. DATE: 13th JANUARY 2026 P.C. 1. The present Application is preferred under Section 378(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, challenging the judgment and order of acquittal passed in Criminal Case No. 545/SS/2016 by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 63rd Court, Andheri, Mumbai whereby the Respondents came to be acquitted of the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the Applicant submits that the Applicant is the original complainant as well as the victim in the present case. 3. Learned counsel further submits that in view of the recent decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Celestium Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. v. A. p. 1 Laxmi LAXMI SUBHASH SONTAKKE Digitally signed by LAXMI SUBHASH SONTAKKE Date: 2026.01.13 15:27:43 +0530 14 ALP 366-19.DOC Gnanasekaran, reported in 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1320, the Applicant would be entitled to prefer an Appeal under Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. He, therefore, seeks leave to withdraw the present Criminal Application with liberty to file an Appeal under Section 372 of the Code before the learned Sessions Court. 4. Reserving the liberty as prayed for, the Applicant is permitted to withdraw the present Application, in view of the settled legal position as enunciated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Celestium Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. (supra). 5. If such Appeal is filed before the learned Sessions Court within a period of eight (8) weeks from today, the Applicant shall be entitled to the benefit of the period during which the present Application remained pending, for the purpose of seeking condonation of delay, if any. 6. If the applicant prefers an Appeal within a period of 8 weeks as directed, before the learned Sessions Court, considering that the proceedings in respect of which the Summary Criminal Cases have been preferred are old proceedings, the Sessions Court may expeditiously decide the Appeal filed before it. 7. The Registry is directed to verify and return the original certified copy of the impugned judgment and order to the learned Advocate for the Applicant, for the purpose of filing the Appeal before the Sessions Court, on submitting a p. 2 Laxmi 14 ALP 366-19.DOC photocopy of the impugned order. Registry shall verify the photocopy and return the certified copy to the learned Advocate for the Applicant. 8. The Appeal is accordingly disposed of as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty. In view of disposal of the Appeal, nothing survives in the above Interim Application and the same stands disposed of. (AARTI SATHE, J.) p. 3 Laxmi