( 1 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3494 OF 2009 Vasant s/o. Dattatray Bhurkapalle .. Applicant Versus Anil s/o. Govindrao Manjramkar and ors. .. Respondents Mrs. Ranjana D. Reddy, Advocate for the applicant. Mrs. B.R. Khekale, A.P.P. for respondent/State. CORAM : P.R. BORKAR,J. DATED : 03.11.2009 P.C. :- 1. Heard Adv. Mrs. Reddy for the applicant. Mrs. Reddy has taken me through the complaint, judgment and other documents on record. In para 14 of the judgment, the learned Magistrate has come to following conclusion :- “14. ..... On the contrary, the defence of accused is found probable. Thus the possibility of issuance of disputed cheque by accused in favour of complainant towards security of loan amount cannot be ruled out and ignored as the complainant himself admitted that he has taken ( 2 ) the disputed cheque as a security to the loan amount. As such after considering the all circumstances, it can not be held that the disputed cheque was issued towards discharge of legally enforceable liability and thus, I answer point No.1 in negative.” 2. From para 19 of the judgment it is clear that the Magistrate has held that the offence is not committed as essential ingredient that the disputed cheque for discharge of enforceable liability was not issued, though he answered point Nos. 2 to 4 in favour of the complainant/applicant. Mrs. Reddy, relied upon case of I.C.D.S. Ltd., V/s. Beemna Shabeer and another, AIR 2002 S.C. 3014. There is legal point involved in this matter and which needs consideration. In this view of the matter, leave granted to file appeal. 3. The Application is allowed and disposed of. The Criminal Appeal be registered. [P.R. BORKAR,J.] snk/2009/NOV09/cra3494.09