IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMIAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRI. APPLICATION NO.3644 OF 2007 IN Appeal No. of 2007 Jankalyan Nagari Pat Sanstha Mydt .. Petitioner V/s Sanjay Bhimrao Ghadge and Anr. ... Respondents Shri Uday P. Warunjikar for Ptitioner R.N.Kachare for Respondent CORAM:R.S.Mohite,J. DATED:15th July 2008 P.C.:- 1. This is an application for leave to appeal. The accused have been acquitted for an offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. The facts indicate that it was a case of the complainant that parents of the accused had taken loan of Rs.2,50,000/- and that son issued a cheque dated 6-6-2006 in discharge of liability of his parents. The case of the accused was that blank cheque was in fact taken when the loan was disbursed to the parents. The trial Court has recorded the evidence and does indicate that the witness of the bank not in a position to state that when the amount was written on the cheque. He also admitted that hand writing on cheque was different than the signature. In this view of the matter the court accepted the defence of the accused. It is sought to be contended that there is presumption in favour of the Bank. If the defence of the accused is that the amount is not entered by him then in such a case there can be no presumption as regards the consideration as written on the cheque. If the finding is that amount is entered into on behalf of the complainant bank then in that case it is incumbent upon the bank to prove liability which was due as on the date of issue of cheque. this can be done simply by producing running account. That has not been done and in such a situation the court has acquitted the accused under Section 138 of N.I. Act as accruing debt liability of the accused has not been proved. 2. In my opinion, the view taken by the trial court is a possible vice and this is not a fit case to interfere in an appeal against acquitted.Hence leave refused. Consequently the appeal papers to be filed. (R.S.Mohite,J.)