1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. Criminal Application No. 967 of 2009 In Criminal Appeal No. 967 of 2009 Nitin v. Mohd Shafeeque -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Court's or Judge's Orders. Mr Manoj Sable, Adv for appellant Mr R. Sharma h/f Mr Anand Parchure, Adv for respondent Coram : A.P. Bhangale, J Dated : 3rd August 2009 1. Heard Mr Manoj Sable, learned counsel for applicant and Mr Sharma, learned counsel for respondent. Cheque which was dishonoured was issued in the name of Firm while complaint was filed in individual name. It has been held that owing to the failure on the part of complainant that he is proprietor of the Firm in whose name the cheque was issued, complaint was liable to be dismissed. Learned counsel for the applicant contends that Proprietory Firm and the Proprietor- complainant are not distinct entities. These questions need to be examined. Hence, application seeking leave to appeal is allowed. 2 2. Appeal admitted. Call for R & P. Action under Section 390 Cr.P.C. to follow. Judge. Hsj