Allowed

Goodworth Finlease Pvt. Ltd. Mumbai Thr. Its CEO Mr. Harshad Rajendra Agarkar v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Bombay HC18 Jan 2021APPA/394/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur Bench, granted leave to appeal in Criminal Appeal No.394 of 2019 arising from a cheque dishonour case. The court allowed the Criminal Application, ordered registration of the Criminal Appeal, and instructed the learned counsel to list it for final hearing.

What did the court decide?

Leave to file appeal granted; Criminal Application allowed; Criminal Appeal registered; Appeal listed for final hearing.

Goodworth Finlease Pvt. Ltd. Mumbai Thr. Its CEO Mr. Harshad… — Cheque Dishonour | Bombay HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

8appa 394.2019

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR .

¶4

CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APPA) NO. 394 OF 2019 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.................OF 2021

¶5

(Goodworth Finlease Pvt. Ltd. Mumbai Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Anr.)

¶6

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram,
appearances, Court's orders of directionsCourt's or Judge's orders.
and Registrar's Orders.

¶7

Shri Y.J. Sheikh, Advocate for the applicant/
appellant.
Shri A.K. Dobade, Advocate for respondent No.2.

¶8

CORAM : PUSHPA V. GANEDIWALA, J.
 JANUARY 18, 2021.

¶9

Heard Shri Sheikh, learned counsel for
the applicant/ appellant and Shri Dobade, learned
counsel for respondent No.2 at length. Respondent
No.1 is already deleted as per Court’s order dated
11/09/2019.

¶10

2]On perusal of para 16 of the impugned
judgment dated 31/01/2019 passed by the JMFC,
Court No.5, Amravati in SCC No. 3760/2009, there
appears to be substance in the contention of the
learned counsel for the applicant/ appellant that only
on the point of alleged incorrect entry in the
statement of loan account of the respondent/ accused
with the applicant/ appellant Company and despite
the fact that the respondent has admitted issuance of

¶11

¶12

8appa 394.2019

¶13

cheque and it bears his signature, he has been
acquitted.

¶14

3]In this view of the matter, leave to file
appeal is granted. The application stands allowed.
The Criminal Appeal be registered.

¶15

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO...................../2021 .

¶16

Heard.

¶17

2]Admit.

¶18

3]Shri Dobade, learned Counsel, waives
notice for respondent No.2.

¶19

4]List the appeal for final hearing as per its

¶20

turn.

¶21

JUDGE

¶22

Sumit

Goodworth Finlease Pvt. Ltd. Mumbai Thr. Its CEO Mr. Harshad Rajendra Agarkar v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Goodworth Finlease Pvt. Ltd. Mumbai Thr. Its CEO Mr. Harshad Rajendra Agarkar v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Suraj S/O Chandu Kasarkar Vs State of Mah., Thr. P.S. Yavatmal City, Distyavatmal

The Shegaon Shree Agrasen Sahakari Pat Sanstha Ltd. Thr. Branch Manager Rajesh Baliramsingh Thakur Vs Jaykumar Arjundas Tikyani

Sanjay S/O Gunwantrao Deshmukh Vs State of Mah. Thr. Pso Ps Shegaon Dist.Buldhana

Amar S/O Govindappa Bhakre Vs State of Maharashtra, Thr. Pso Ps Chikhli, Dist. Buldhana

Shamrao S/O Ramchandra Vaidya and Anor(in Jail). Vs State of Mah Thr Pso Ashti(City)

Sau. Kavita W/O Pankaj Sharma Vs Dheeraj Textiles, a Partnership Firm Thr. Its Partners Ravindrakumar Shitaldas Arora and Another