1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2908/2009 (Tushar Patil vs. Dr.Sanjay Rajhans) Office Notes, Office Memorandum of Coram appearances, Court's orders of directions & Registrar's orders. Court's or Judges Order Advocate for applicant absent Mr Patwardhan,Adv.for Respondent *** C ORAM : A.P. BHANGALE, J. DATED : 16 th September, 2009. 1. By this application, the applicant prayed for grant of special leave to appeal u/s 378(4) of the Cr.P. C. The applicant and his advocate both are sent. 2. Heard submissions advanced by learned Advocate for Respondent Mr. Mr R M Patwardhan. He stoutly objected grant of leave on the ground that the respondent/accused was a licensee under leave and license agreement executed between the complainant and the accused. The respondent was having a Physiotherapy Unit along with Dr. Dharmadhikari who migrated to Pune, some years back. The accused had filed Civil Suit No. 592/2005 in the Small Causes Court at Nagpur since there was dispute between the complainant and his brother. The Respondent/accused prayed for relief as to whom the rent shall be payable – whether to the complainant or his brother. The suit was, however, dismissed by the learned Additional Judge Small Causes Court at Nagpur. 3. The applicant (complainant ) had issued notice dated 24.3.2007 revoking the license and claimed possession for his bona fide need, with arrears of occupation charges/rent. The notice was received by the non- applicant. The Respondent gave reply to the said notice on 18.5.2007. He 2 had also issued a post-dated cheque bearing Cheque No. 550526 dated 23.5.2007 drawn upon Bank of India, Ranapratap Nagar, Nagpur in favour of applicant (complainant ) for a sum of Rs. 77,000/- enclosing therewith the receipt, informing the applicant that receipt shall be executed and sent back to respondent immediately, if not payment under the said cheque would be stopped. Under these circumstances, the cheque for a sum of Rs. 77,000/- was issued issued along with receipt to be executed by the applicant. This was done in view of the statutory obligation on the part of the landlord to issue written receipt for any amount received in respect of the premises in such form and in such manner as may be prescribed in view of Section 31 of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999. Thus, it was obligatory on the part of the applicant/ (complainant ) to issue receipt before presenting the cheque for encashment thereof. All these facts were brought to the notice of the trial Court, which were discussed threadbare at length, by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class & Special Court, Nagpur in the impugned judgment delivered in respect of Criminal Complaint Case No.14262/2007. 4. I have carefully perused the impugned judgment and order in the light of submissions advanced by learned Advocate for the respondent. In my opinion, in view of the cogent and plausible reasons which are self- explanatory, no interference is called for in the impugned judgment and order. Hence application for grant of leave is rejected. JUDGE sahare