* 1 * W.P. 2824.2010 21.2.2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 2824 OF 2010 Shri. Jairam Tolaji Shinde .... Petitioner V/S. 1. Ashok Builcon Ltd and Ors. .... Respondents * * * * * * Mr. Kishore Patil i/by. Mr. P.N. Joshi, Advocate for the petitioner. Mrs. U.V. Kezriwal, APP for the State-respondents. Coram : Smt. R.P. SondurBaldota, J. 21st February, 2011. P.C. : 1. This petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, challenges the order dated 19th August, 2010 dismissing Criminal Revision Application filed by the petitioner against the order of issuance of process by the trial Court in the proceedings filed under Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act by respondent no.1. * 2 * W.P. 2824.2010 21.2.2011 2. It has been contended on behalf of the petitioner that after reading the averments made in the complaint, it cannot be said, on a prima-facie view, that the petitioner has committed an offence punishable under Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act. Perusal of the complaint, which is annexed to the petition, shows that in the course of transaction of sale of land between the petitioner and respondent no.1, substantial loss has been suffered by respondent no.1 on account of non-fullfilment of the promise by the petitioner. Therefore, on 19th November, 2006 it was agreed between the two, that the petitioner would pay a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- to respondent no.1 by way of damages. On the same day, he issued the cheque in question to respondent no.1. There is no dispute as regards the issuance of the cheque. After perusing the complaint, the statement in verification and the documents accompanying the complaint, the trial court by its order dated 30th September, 2008 issued process under Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act against the petitioner, which order came to be challenged by filing Revision Application. The Revisional Court after going through the records and proceedings came to a finding that admittedly the petitioner * 3 * W.P. 2824.2010 21.2.2011 has issued the cheque in favour of respondent no.1. The cheque, when presented for payment to the bank, was dishonoured for the reason funds insufficient”. Therefore, statutory notice came to be “ served upon the petitioner who failed to make the payment. In these circumstances, the offence under Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act was made out and it cannot be said that the complaint does not disclose the offence. The revisional court also holds that the defence raised by the petitioner cannot be taken into consideration at the stage of issuance of process and that the petitioner will have to raise his defence at the time of trial. There is no infirmity whatsoever in the view expressed by the revisional court. Hence, the petition is dismissed. [Smt. R.P. SondurBaldota, J]