1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.299 OF 2005 The State of Maharahstra ..Appellant V/s Mahadu Laxman Gadkar ..Respondent ......... Mrs.B.R. Khekale, A.P.P. for appellant/State. Mr.Suhas B. Rohile, Advocate for respondent. ........ CORAM : SHRIHARI P. DAVARE,J. DATE : 21st June, 2010. PER COURT : 1. Heard Mrs.B.R. Khekale, learned A.P.P. for appellant (original complainant) as well as Mr.Suhas B. Rohile, learned counsel for respondent (original accused). The appellant herein sought leave to file appeal against the judgment and order of acquittal dated 21st December, 2004, thereby acquitting the respondent herein for the offence punishable under Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. Respondent (original accused) faced the trial in Regular Criminal Case No.12/1999 for the offence punishable under Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code and was acquitted by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Osmanabad by judgment and order dated 21.12.2004. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the said judgment and order, the appellant-State has preferred the present appeal. 3. Respondent-accused was the Chairman of Vividh Karyakari Seva Sahakari Society, Naigaon at the relevant time and 2 it is alleged that he committed misappropriation of the amount of Rs.13,514.75 paise. The prosecution examined only one witness i.e. P.W.1-Fakirchand Kasbe to substantiate the said charge. However, during cross examination, he has admitted that respondent-accused has deposited an amount of Rs.19,165.39 paise in the year 1987 itself whereas the complaint was lodged against him on 15.04.1988. 4. On the face of the said position, the learned trial Judge has observed that the amount of misappropriation is shown as Rs.13,514.75 paise and complaint in that respect was filed on 15.04.1988, but respondent-accused has deposited amount of Rs. 19,165.39 paise in the society in the year 1987 itself and respondent-accused is entitled to benefit of the payment of the said amount and consequently, answered point no.1 in negative and acquitted the accused. 5. I have gone through the impugned judgment and order and Record and Proceedings with the assistance of learned counsel for the parties. Considering the reasons adopted by the learned trial Judge, the same do not appear to be perverse and the said reasoning can not be faulted with. Moreover, view adopted by trial Judge, after scrutinizing and appreciating the evidence on record, is a possible view to be adopted and no interference therein is warranted in the appellate jurisdiction. 6. In the result, there is no substance in the application seeking leave to file appeal against the judgment and order of acquittal dated 21.12.2004, and therefore, leave to file appeal stands refused and appeal no.299/2005 stands dismissed. 3 7. Record and Proceedings be sent back to the concerned Court. (SHRIHARI P. DAVARE) JUDGE gas/cria299.05