Digitally signed by DINESHDINESH SADANAND 28-appeal-823-2007.odt SADANAND SHERLA SHERLA Date: 2026.09.07 19:21:10 +0530 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 823 OF 2007 T.C.I. Finance Ltd. …Appellants V/s. M/s. Salstar Foods & Beverages Ltd. and Ors. ...Respondents. ………….. None for the Appellants. Mrs. S.S. Kaushik, APP for the Respondent/State. ………….. CORAM : N.R. BORKAR, J. DATE : 7.9.2026. P.C. : 1. This appeal takes exception to the order dated 21.12.2001 passed by the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 37th Court, Esplanade, Mumbai in C.C.No.215/S/1997. 2. By the impugned order, the learned Magistrate has dismissed the complaint filed by the present appellants for want of prosecution and acquitted respondent Nos.1 to 3 herein for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. 3. This appeal is pending since 2007 and no steps are taken to serve respondent Nos.1 to 3. It appears that the appellants are not interested in prosecuting the present appeal. The Appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution. [N.R.BORKAR, J.] Dinesh S. Sherla 1/1

Digitally signed by DINESHDINESH SADANAND 28-appeal-823-2007.odt SADANAND SHERLA SHERLA Date: 2026.09.07 19:21:10 +0530 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 823 OF 2007 T.C.I. Finance Ltd. …Appellants V/s. M/s. Salstar Foods & Beverages Ltd. and Ors. ...Respondents. ………….. None for the Appellants. Mrs. S.S. Kaushik, APP for the Respondent/State. ………….. CORAM : N.R. BORKAR, J. DATE : 7.9.2026. P.C. : 1. This appeal takes exception to the order dated 21.12.2001 passed by the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 37th Court, Esplanade, Mumbai in C.C.No.215/S/1997. 2. By the impugned order, the learned Magistrate has dismissed the complaint filed by the present appellants for want of prosecution and acquitted respondent Nos.1 to 3 herein for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. 3. This appeal is pending since 2007 and no steps are taken to serve respondent Nos.1 to 3. It appears that the appellants are not interested in prosecuting the present appeal. The Appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution. [N.R.BORKAR, J.] Dinesh S. Sherla 1/1