Rajaji Sonaji Budhwant v. Dipak Bhausaheb More

930-alp95.23

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL BY PRIVATE PARTY NO. 95 OF 2023 Rajaji Sonaji Budhwant Applicant

Versus

Dipak Bhausaheb More Respondent Mr. S. R. Andhale, advocate for the Applicant CORAM : SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE, J.

DATE : 01st NOVEMBER, 2023.

P.C. :

Heard learned Counsel for the applicant. Respondent, despite service, remained absent. On going through the impugned judgment, it appears that the learned Trial Court has acquitted the respondent-accused mainly on the ground that the complainant could not prove the fact of dishonour of cheque in dispute. Admittedly, the memo issued by Yes Bank is produced on record by the complainant mentioning that the cheque issued by the respondent-accused got dishonoured due to "funds insuffcientt. However, it appears that the said

930-alp95.23 return memo was not shown to the bank offcer while examining him. However, in the statutory notice at Exhibit-27 itself, the fact of dishonour of cheque in dispute was communicated to the respondent-accused, but he did not reply the same. Moreover, in the statement under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure also, the Respondentaccused has admitted that he had received such notice. Further, the entire Chief-examination wherein there is mention of dishonour of cheque, remained unchallenged since the respondent-accused or anybody on his behalf did not cross examine the complainant. Therefore, considering all these aspects, the applicant has made out an arguable case which requires further consideration.

In view of the same, Criminal Application stands allowed and the appeal of the complainant be registered after removal of offce objections, if any.

SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE JUDGE adb