Shriram Finance Ltd vs Namdeo Paulad Patil - Leave to Appeal
Summary
The Bombay High Court is hearing applications for leave to appeal an acquittal order under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The court has decided to keep the matter in abeyance pending a decision from a larger bench of the Supreme Court on a related issue concerning the remedy of appeal for complainants.
What changed
The Bombay High Court, Bench at Aurangabad, is considering multiple applications for leave to appeal orders of acquittal under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The court's immediate focus is on the proper forum for such appeals, referencing a Supreme Court decision in Celestium Financial v. Ganasekaran which suggested appeals lie before the District and Sessions Court. However, the applicant's counsel highlighted a pending Supreme Court case, M/s Everest Automobiles v. M/s. Rajit Enterprises, which questions whether a complainant can be considered a victim for the remedy under Section 372 of the Cr.P.C. This case has been referred to a larger bench.
Given the pending Supreme Court decision that could impact the appellate jurisdiction for Section 138 cases, the Bombay High Court has agreed to defer hearing the merits of these leave to appeal applications. The matters will be heard after the Supreme Court's larger bench renders its decision, with parties granted liberty to move the court for circulation thereafter. This effectively pauses the appellate process for these specific cases until higher judicial clarity is provided, impacting the timeline for resolution and potential enforcement actions related to the underlying acquittals.
What to do next
- Monitor Supreme Court decision in M/s Everest Automobiles v. M/s. Rajit Enterprises (SLP (Crl.) No.12350 of 2024)
- Prepare to re-file or proceed with leave to appeal applications once Supreme Court decision is issued
- Review internal procedures for appeals under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act based on Supreme Court guidance
Source document (simplified)
Select the following parts of the judgment
| Precedent Analysis | Court's Reasoning |
| Conclusion | |
For entire doc: Unmark Mark
## Unlock Advanced Research with PRISM AI
Integrated with over 4 crore judgments and laws — designed for legal practitioners, researchers, students and institutions
- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc -... Upgrade to Premium [Cites 3, Cited by 0 ] ### Bombay High Court
Shriram Finance Ltd Formerly Shriram ... vs Namdeo Paulad Patil on 23 March, 2026
-1-
59-ALP-117-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
APPLN. FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL BY PVT. PARTY NO. 117 OF 2025
SHRIRAM FINANCE LTD (FORMERLY SHRIRAM CITY UNION FINANCE
LTD) THR. PRAVIN KISHOR KASAB
VERSUS
NAMDEO PAULAD PATIL
......
Advocate for Appellant : Mr. Vinod Y. Bhide
Advocate for Respondent : Mr. Ujwal Patil
......
WITH
APPLN. FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL BY PVT. PARTY NO. 86 OF 2025
WITH
APPLN. FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL BY PVT. PARTY NO. 89 OF 2025
WITH
APPLN. FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL BY PVT. PARTY NO. 81 OF 2025
WITH
APPLN. FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL BY PVT. PARTY NO. 85 OF 2025
WITH
APPLN. FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL BY PVT. PARTY NO. 82 OF 2025
......
CORAM : ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J. DATED : 23 MARCH 2026
PER COURT :
- The instant application has been preferred seeking leave to
file an appeal against the order of acquittal from offence under [Section
138](https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1823824/) of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
- This matter was earlier heard and kept for today on a court
query.
59-ALP-117-2025
- Learned counsel Shri Ujwal Patil for respondent submits
that, in view of the recent decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in
Celestium Financial v. Ganasekaran Etc. [(2025) SCC OnLine SC 1320],
the appeal lies before learned District and Sessions Court and not before
this Court.
- Learned counsel Shri Vinod Bhide for applicant pointed out
that, in the above judgment there is no mandate to approach Sessions
Court. However, he further pointed out that, recently the Hon'ble Apex
Court in the case of M/s Everest Automobiles v. M/s. Rajit Enterprises in
Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.12350 of 2024, on the issue
whether complainant in 138 N.I. Act, can be said to be victim so as to
avail remedy of 372 of Cr.P.C., has referred the said case to larger Bench
and therefore he urges that till decision of larger Bench of Hon'ble Apex
Court, this matter may be kept in abeyance by keeping all points on
merits open. He placed on record a copy of the order passed in SLP (Crl.)
No.12350 of 2024 for ready reference.
- Learned counsel for respondent also agreed to the same.
Resultantly, present leave to file appeal shall be heard after decision of
proposed larger Bench and parties shall be at liberty to move the Court
for circulation of ALP thereafter.
(ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J.)
Tandale
Named provisions
Related changes
Source
Classification
Who this affects
Taxonomy
Browse Categories
Get Courts & Legal alerts
Weekly digest. AI-summarized, no noise.
Free. Unsubscribe anytime.
Get alerts for this source
We'll email you when India Bombay High Court publishes new changes.