:1: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.377 OF 2003 CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.377 OF 2003 CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.377 OF 2003 Shri. S.L. Yadav ...Applicant Vs. Shri. Dilip Kapadia & Ors. ...Respondents Shri. Prakash Naik for the Applicant. Ms. M.M. Deshmukh A.P.P.for the Respondents. CORAM : A. S. OKA, J. CORAM : A. S. OKA, J. CORAM : A. S. OKA, J. DATED : JUNE 30, 2005. DATED : JUNE 30, 2005. DATED : JUNE 30, 2005. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: 1. Heard Counsel appearing for the Applicant and the learned A.P.P. for the State. The Applicant has been convicted under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The Applicant was sentenced to suffer simple imprisonment for six months and the Applicant alongwith other Accused were directed to pay a fine amount of Rs.25,00,000/-. Appeal preferred by the Applicant to the Sessions Court has been dismissed. 2. After having heard the learned Counsel for the Applicant, I find the findings of the Courts are based on appreciation of evidence on record. All material evidence has been considered by the courts. There is no procedural illegality or manifest error of law. 3. It is not permissiable to re-appreciate the evidence in Revision Application. There is no merit in Revision Application. The same is rejected. JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE