1 Cri-A-5077-587-10.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Mhi CRININAL APPLICATION NO. 5077 OF OF 2010 ALONG WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 587 OF 2010 Sawantwadi Urban Co-op. Bank Ltd. ... Applicant Vs. Shri Dattaprasad Vasudeo Bakre & Anr. ... Respondent Mr. Vinod Jadhav, Advocate, for the applicnat Mr.V.B.Konde-Deshmukh, APP, for the respondent No.2 - State. CORAM: J.H.BHATIA,J. DATE : 10th March, 2011. P.C. 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the applicant. 2. The applicant is a Co-operative Bank and the original complainant. According to the complainant, the respondent-accused had taken loan of Rs.2 lakh on 31.3.2000. On 5.8.2008, for repayment of the balance amount, the accused issued a cheque of Rs.1,80,000/-. However, that cheque was dishonoured and inspite of service of statutory notice, the accused failed to make payment. The trial Court observed that admittedly, the period of loan was five years. That period had come to an end on 31.3.2005. If the period of limitation begins to run from 2 Cri-A-5077-587-10.sxw that date, the liability could be legally enforceable within three years i.e. upto 31.3.2008. The cheque in question was issued on 5.8.2008 i.e. after the loan had become time-barred and, therefore, there was no legally enforceable debt or liability on that date. In view of this, I find no fault with the order of acquittal passed by the trial Court. 3. The learned Counsel for the applicant contended that on 23.2.2008 and again on 31.3.2008, the accused had admitted that amount of Rs.1 lakh was due from him on that day and thus within the period of limitation, he had acknowledged the liability. Admittedly, no such document was produced before the trial Court. The applicant seeks permission to lead additional evidence to prove this fact. There is no valid reason to grant such a permission because no ground is given as to why such evidence, if it was already in possession of the complainant, was not produced before the trial Court. 4. In view of the above, the applications seeking leave to prefer appeal against acquittal as well as to lead additional evidence are rejected. (J.H.BHATIA,J.)