Birmal Vasudev Bobade vs The State Of Maharashtra And ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 3532 Bom

                                                              Cri.W.P. No.492/2022
                                         :: 1 ::


           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
                               BENCH AT AURANGABAD


               CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.492 OF 2022


 Birmal s/o Vasudev Bobade                              ... PETITIONER
          VERSUS
 The State of Maharashtra & anr.                        ... RESPONDENTS
                               .......
 Mr. Shailendra S. Kulkarni, Advocate for petitioner
 Mr. S.P. Sonpawale, A.P.P. for respondent No.1 - State
                               .......

                                     CORAM :       R. G. AVACHAT, J.
                                     DATE :        31st MARCH, 2022.
 ORDER:

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and

learned A.P.P. for respondent No.1 - State.

2. The challenge in this petition is to an order dated

21/3/2022, passed by Additional Sessions Judge-1, Bhoom,

on application Exh.30 in Criminal Appeal No.22/2017. The

petitioner has been convicted for offence punishable under

Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The

respondent No.2 was the original complainant in a case

instituted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments

Act. The petitioner has preferred Criminal Appeal, being

Appeal No.22/2017 against his conviction and sentence. The

respondent/ complainant also filed a civil suit for recovery of

Cri.W.P. No.492/2022 :: 2 ::

the amount covered under the cheque. It being Civil Suit

No.52/2011. The suit was decreed. The petitioner preferred

appeal thereagainst (Civil Appeal No.53/2019). The appellate

Court allowed the appeal, remanding the suit back to the trial

Court to decide it afresh. The petitioner, therefore, preferred

application Exh.30, requesting the appellate Court to defer the

hearing of Criminal Appeal until the decision of the civil suit.

The appellate Court rejected the application. Hence the

petition.

3. It was a criminal case instituted otherwise on

police report (complaint), being S.C.C. No.85/2009. The

petitioner herein was convicted. Appeal thereagainst is

pending. It is evident from the order impugned herein that

the arguments in the appeal were over and the matter was

reserved for passing judgment. If the appeal fails, the

petitioner has further remedy of revision or writ. In the facts

and circumstances of the case, reference to Sections 41 to 43

of the Evidence Act is irrelevant herein. This Court is,

therefore, not even inclined to issue notice in the matter.

Criminal Writ Petition is dismissed.

( R. G. AVACHAT ) JUDGE fmp/-