1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1819 OF 2010 Ashok Santukrao Apet ..APPLICANT -VERSUS- Shahaji Digambar Chavan and another ..RESPONDENTS ......... Mr. Padalkar holding for Mr. R.S. Deshmukh, advocate for applicant. Mr. K.B. Jadhavar, advocate for respondent no.1. Mr. N.H. Borade, A.G.P. for respondent no.2. ........ (CORAM : V.R.KINGAONKAR,J.) DATE : 31 st August, 2010. PER COURT : 1. This is an application seeking grant of leave to appeal. 2. The applicant is the original complainant and the respondent no.1 is the original accused. The applicant had filed complaint for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. It was registered as S.C.C. No.1386/2007. The learned Judicial Magistrate (F.C.), Parali Vaijnath rendered the judgment of acquittal in the private complaint case, for the reason that the applicant could not establish the details regarding the payment of loan amount for which the cheque was allegedly issued by the respondent no.1. 2 3. Heard learned counsel and perused the impugned judgment. 4. It is important to notice that the respondent no.1 did not give reply to the demand notice. This conduct of the respondent no.1 is not duly considered by the learned Judicial Magistrate. It appears that the applicant during the course of cross examination gave general statement that in the month of February, 2007, the loan was advanced to the respondent no.1. He did not give the dates and other details. It is further necessary to notice that the respondent no.1 was required to discharge burden which is to be placed on him in view of the statutory presumption available under the provisions of Negotiable Instruments Act. All these aspects required thorough consideration and appropriate findings after the due assessment of the record. In this view of the matter, leave to appeal is granted. The application is allowed. (V.R.KINGAONKAR) JUDGE gas/cri1819.10