Kuldip Babarao Taral v. State Of Maharashtra Thr. Public Prosecutor And Another

appa998.17.O.odt 1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APPA) NO.998 OF 2017 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. OF 2018 (Kuldip Babarao Taral Vs. State of Maharashtra thr. PP and another) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoramda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's orders.

and Registrar's Orders.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ms. D.V. Sapkal, Advocate for Petitioner.

Shri V.P. Maldhure, APP for Respondent No.1.

Shri K.P. Mahalle, Advocate for Respondent No.2. CORAM: ROHIT B. DEO, J.

DATE: 6 th MARCH, 2018.

Arguable issues are raised. This court would like to have a second look at the evidence on record and the question of law answered by the learned Magistrate. The judgment of acquittal is substantially predicated on the premise that since the cheque was issued in favour of the partnership firm, the partner who instituted the complaint is not a payee or a holder in due course.

The application is allowed.

Leave to appeal is granted.

Criminal Appeal No. /2018:

Heard.

Admit.

Notice is waived.

Action under Section 390 of the Criminal

appa998.17.O.odt 2 Procedure Code shall be initiated.

JUDGE NSN