GEETA MOHAN SHAH v. KIRIT RATILAL SHAH and ANR.
Court: Bombay High Court
Judgment date:
Case summary
Bombay High Court judgment dated 2026-08-18. GEETA MOHAN SHAH v. KIRIT RATILAL SHAH and ANR. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
1 904-APEAL 678-04. doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 678 OF 2004 Geeta Mohan Shah … Appellant Vs. Kirit Ratilal Shah & Anr. … Respondents ----- Mr. Prathamesh Naik h/f Kocharekar for the Appellant. Mr. Vivek Rane for Respondent No. 1. Ms. Rutuja Ambekar, APP for Respondent No. 2-State. ----- CORAM : N. R. BORKAR, J. DATE : 18TH AUGUST 2026 P. C. : Digitally signed by MUGDHA th MUGDHA MANOJ 1. This Appeal takes exception to the judgment and order dated 04 MANOJ PARANJAPE PARANJAPE Date: 2026. 08. 27 18:25:53 +0530 March 2003 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Raigad-Alibag in Criminal Appeal No. 27 of 2002. 2. By the impugned judgment and order, the Learned Additional Sessions Judge has allowed the appeal filed by Respondent No. 1 against the judgment and order of the trial court, by which Respondent No. 1 was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. 3.
I have heard Learned Counsel for the Appellant and Learned Counsel for Respondent No. 1 and perused the impugned judgment and order. Mugdha 1 of 2 2 904-APEAL 678-04. doc 4. The learned appellate court to acquit the Respondent No. 1 has recorded the finding that complainant has failed to prove that there was any monetary liability on accused to repay the money to him and that he had done so by issuing the cheque in question. The appellate court has thus, held that, the complainant has failed to prove that cheque in question was issued towards discharge of legally enforceable liability. 5. The above finding is not shown to be perverse. In that view of the matter, no interference is called for in the impugned judgment and order. The Criminal Appeal is thus dismissed. (N. R. BORKAR, J. ) Mugdha 2 of 2
Source: Bombay High Court. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.