Cyrus Noshirwan Kartak vs State of Maharashtra

Judgment text excerpt

2026:BHC-AS:21287 wp 5770 of 2025.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.5770 OF 2025 Cyrus Noshirwan Kartak ... Petitioner versus State of Maharashtra and Anr. … Respondents Mr. Mohit Bharadwaj, for Petitioner. Mr. P.P.Malshe, APP for State. Ms. Snehankita M. Munj with Mr. Shraddha Kamble i/by Mr. Jatin Karia (Shah) for Respondent No.2. CORAM: N.J.JAMADAR, J. RESERVED ON : 16 APRIL 2026 PRONOUNCED ON : 5 MAY 2026 JUDGMENT : 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith, and, with the consent of the parties, heard finally. 2. By this Petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India and Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (the Code), the Petitioner, who has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 138 read with Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (N.I.Act, 1881), in 17 complaints, seeks declaration that the Petitioner be deemed to have been convicted in only one complaint, and, accordingly, the substantive sentence as well as in default sentence be modified, and, in the alternative, it be declared that the sentence which the Petitioner has already undergone shall be treated as the total sentence in all 17 complaints, including the SSP 1/27 wp 5770 of 2025.doc sentence in default of payment of compensation awarded by the learned Magistrate. 3. The Petition arises in the backdrop of the following facts : 2.1 Respondent No.2 – complainant claimed to have sold and delivered goods to the Mintaur Engineering Private Ltd. (A1), of which the Petitioner (A2) was the director. Asserting that an amount of Rs.22,68,07,788/- was due and payable by the accused towards the price of the goods sold and delivered and in discharge of the said liability, accused Nos.1 and 2 had d