1 Appln 120-2011 Anand IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.120 OF 2011 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.121 OF 2011 Jankar Vithoba Parshuram .Applicant V/s. Shobha D. Ranpise & anr. .Respondents Mrs.Jaymala Ostwala i/b. M/s.J.J.Associates, Advocate, for the Applicant Mr.S.M.Oak i/b.Mr.Sagar Joshi, Advocate, for Respondent No.1 Mrs.P.P.Bhosale, APP, for Respondent No.2 - State CORAM : R.C.CHAVAN, J. DATE : 25TH JULY, 2011 P.C. . Heard the learned Counsel for the respective parties. These are the applications for leave to file an Appeal against acquittal of respondent No.1 ordered by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 59th Court, Kurla, Mumbai, principally relying on the evidence of one Chandrabhaga Yeshwant Palaskar DW-2 whom the learned Magistrate found to be an independent and reliable witness. The respondent No.1 in this case had 2 Appln 120-2011 come up with the contention that she is not Shobha Ranpise but Shobha Ranbhise. Curiously, Vakalatnama filed in this Court shows her name to be Shobha Ranpise. The learned Counsel for respondent No.1 states that such Vakalatnama may have been filed because the office would not have accepted Vakalatnama in different name. All the same, the fact remains that the respondent had not refused having signed the cheques in question. There is also pro-note in the sum of Rs. 300,000/-. In view of this, findings recorded by the Magistrate may require a fresh look. Leave granted. 2. Admit. 3. Call for R & P. 4. Action under 390 is not necessary. (R.C.CHAVAN, J.) 3 Appln 120-2011