M/S. Libra (Agencies) Pvt. Ltd vs The State Of Maharashtra And Ors
2021 Latest Caselaw 16221 Bom

                                                                            4. ALP-86-2015.doc

BDP-SPS-TAC




                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

                                    CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 86 OF 2015


              M/S. LIBRA (AGENCIES) PVT LTD.                    ....Applicant.

                    V/s

              THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & Others                 .... Respondents.

                                                     WITH

                                CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.592 OF 2015

                                                      IN

                                CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 86 OF 2015

              M/S. LIBRA (AGENCIES) PVT LTD.                    ....Applicant.

                    V/s

              THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & Others                 .... Respondents.

              ----
              Mr. Devendra Tiwari i/b Siddharth Murarka for the Applicant.
              Ms. A.A. Takalkar, APP for the Respondent/State.
              ---

                                      CORAM: NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.

                                       DATE:     NOVEMBER 23, 2021









                                                             4. ALP-86-2015.doc


P.C.:-

1]       Mr. Tiwari, Counsel for the Applicant submits that they have

already returned the brief to the Applicant and as such not appearing

on behalf of the Applicant.

2] There is delay of about 7 days caused in preferring the present

Application for leave to appeal. The said Application is pending since

2015. The cause cited in the Application is, lawyer to whom the

matter was entrusted has lost the papers. Considering the law laid

down by the Apex Court in the case of Rafiq & Anr vs Munshilal & Anr

reported in 1981 AIR 1400 default of the lawyer cannot be read to the

detriment of the litigant, delay stands condoned. Criminal Application

No.592 of 2015 accordingly stands allowed.

3] Court of learned Metropolitan Magistrate vide its judgment

under challenge dated 26/05/2014 acquitted Respondent Nos. 2 and

3 of the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable

Instruments Act.

4] The case of the complainant/applicant is, in all three cheques

4. ALP-86-2015.doc

were issued for the value of Rs. 1,20,000/-, Rs 1,20,000/- and Rs

1,00,000/- on 20/12/2010, 20/02/2011 and 25/03/2011 respectively,

which were dishonoured. The contention of the Applicant is,

documents such as original cheques, Bank Memo (Exhibits 14 and

15), Demand Notice (Exhibit-16) and Postal Receipts (Exhibit-17) and

Acknowledgment Card (Exhibits 18 and 19) were produced on record.

Complainant's witness Mr. Arun Shinde (C.W.1) entered the witness

box to establish that cheques were issued for admitted debt.

5] The defence of Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 was that the cheques

were issued towards compensation in view of damages suffered by the

complainant. The witness of the complainant Mr. Shinde (C.W.1) in

his cross-examination has admitted that there was no liability to pay

the amount as mentioned in the cheques on the date when the

cheques were issued.

6] In the aforesaid backdrop, Applicant has failed to demonstrate

before the Court below either through oral or documentary evidence

that cheques in question were issued for admitted debt. As the

acquittal is based on failure of the Applicant to demonstrate before the

4. ALP-86-2015.doc

Court below that the cheques were issued for admitted debt, in my

opinion, Court below was justified in acquitting Respondent Nos. 2

and 3/Accused.

5] No case for grant of leave to appeal is made out. As such leave

stands refused. Criminal Application No. 86 of 2015 stands rejected.

( NITIN W. SAMBRE, J. )