1 appln 473 of 2010 vks IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.473 OF 2010 Premshankar Radheshyam Dubey . Applicant. -versus Ranjeet Singh and ors .. Respondents. Mr. Ajay Rai i/b Mr. Akhilesh Singh, for the Applicant. Mr. U. V. Kejariwal, APP for the Respondent State. None for the respondent No.1. CORAM: R.C. CHAVAN, J. DATED: 21st July, 2011 P.C. 1. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the respondent No.2 is reported to be dead and her name be deleted. The proceeding as against her stands abated. 2. This is an application for leave to file appeal against judgment of acquittal, rendered by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 21st Court, Bandra, Mumbai. Learned Magistrate seems to have relied on the judgment of Sanjay Mishra -vs- Kanishka Kapur & ors, 2009 All M.R.(Cri) 1080, though in the reasons part he has not explicitly stated as to what part of the judgment he has relied on. While recording argument, he had noted that Section 139 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, clearly raises a presumption in regard to drawal of check for discharge of any debt or other liability, but that there was no 2 appln 473 of 2010 presumption in respect of debt being legally enforceable liability. This judgment in Sanjay Mishra's case was based on the judgment of Supreme Court in Krishna Janardan Bhatt - vs- Dattatray Hegde, 2008 All M.R. (Cri) 1164. This part of the observation in Krishna Janardan Bhat's case about presumption not extending to legally enforceable debt or liability has been overruled by the Supreme Court in Rangappa -vs- Mohan , 2010, Cri. L. J. 2871. Further, learned Magistrate held that statutory notice was not served upon the accused. Learned counsel for the applicant has made available for my perusal a copy of statutory notice and acknowledgment of notice sent by Registered post which shows that the accused had received the notice. Inspite of this, it is not clear as to how the learned Magistrate could record that the service of notice was not proved. This requires reconsideration. Leave granted. Admit. Call for Record and proceeding. Action under Section 390 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1908. (R. C. CHAVAN, J.)