..(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 APPLICATION NO.2152 of 2007 [LEAVE TO APPEAL] IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. OF 2007 Dinesh P. Mehta. ..Applicant. Versus Pravin Gupta and Anr. ..Respondents. .... Mr.Pankaj J. Das, Adv. h/f. Mr.R.S.Datar, Adv. for the applicant. Mr.Mukesh J. Pabari, Adv. for Respondent No.1. Mr.V.B.Konde-Deshmukh, APP, for Respondent No.1-State. .... CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. DATED : 3rd June, 2008. DATED : 3rd June, 2008. DATED : 3rd June, 2008. P.C.: 1. The applicant-orig.complainant has filed this application for leave to file appeal against the judgment and order dated 9th May, 2007 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 31st Court, Vikroli, Mumbai in Case No.51/SS/2005. By the said judgment and order, the learned Magistrate acquitted the respondent -orig. accused of the offence under Section of 138 of N.I.Act. 2. Heard the learned Advocate for the ..(2).. Applicant-Orig.complainant and the learned Advocate for the respondent No.1-orig.accused. Perused the judgment and order of the learned Magistrate as well as the evidence which has been annexed. 3. The case of the complainant is that the accused was in need of Rs.6 lakhs for his business and the complainant gave him the said amount in cash. The accused has repaid the part of the amount and the balance amount to be repaid was Rs.4,90,000/-. Out of the said amount the accused had made payment of Rs.1 lakh by issuing the cheque in question. As the said cheque was not honoured, complaint came to be filed. 4. There is nothing on record to show that the complainant had Rs.6 lakhs in cash so as to advance it to the accused. Though a huge amount was handed over, as alleged by the complainant, there is no documentary evidence to show that such an amount was given to the accused person. No document has been obtained from the accused in writing regarding giving of Rs.6 lakhs to the ..(3).. accused. No prudent person would advance such a huge amount without obtaining any receipt or anything in writing. Moreover, the amount is not reflected in the Income Tax Returns or in any books of accounts of the complainant. Useful reference may be made to the decision of this Court in the case of Vasudev Ramchand Ahuja Vs. Vasudev Ramchand Ahuja Vs. Vasudev Ramchand Ahuja Vs. Vilas Shripati Kamble Vilas Shripati Kamble Vilas Shripati Kamble reported in 2006(2) Bombay 2006(2) Bombay 2006(2) Bombay C.R.(Cri.) 1 C.R.(Cri.) 1 C.R.(Cri.) 1, wherein it is observed as under : "The observation seen by the trial Court that amount allegedly paid by complainant during period has not been reflected in income Tax returns as well as in books of account. Reasons recorded by the court below on appreciation of evidence on record, impugned judgment cannot be said to be unreasonable and perverse." 5. On the other hand the defence of the accused is that he had entered into an agreement with the complainant for subletting and he has given seven blank cheques including the disputed ..(4).. cheque in respect of the said agreement. The copy of the agreement has been proved and is marked as Exhibit "D". 6. Looking to the above facts, the defence of the accused that the cheque was one of the blank signed cheque amongst seven blank cheques given by him as per the agreement, appears probable. 7. Looking to the evidence on record,I am of the opinion that the view taken by the learned Magistrate is a reasonable and possible view. 8. It is well settled that if the view of acquittal could have been reasonably arrived at then mere circumstance that the lower Court would have taken a different view, would be no ground to interfere. In this connection, there is no dearth of authorities but to eschew prolixity, I am referring to only two of them i.e. AIR 1971 SC 66 AIR 1971 SC 66 AIR 1971 SC 66 Khedu Mohton and Ors. Vs. State of Bihar and Khedu Mohton and Ors. Vs. State of Bihar and Khedu Mohton and Ors. Vs. State of Bihar and C.Anthony Vs. K.G.Raghavan Nair, (2003) 1 SCC 1 C.Anthony Vs. K.G.Raghavan Nair, (2003) 1 SCC 1 C.Anthony Vs. K.G.Raghavan Nair, (2003) 1 SCC 1. In the case of C.Anthony C.Anthony C.Anthony, the Supreme Court has observed that unless the findings of the trial ..(5).. Court are perverse or contrary to the material on record, the High Court cannot in appeal substitute its findings, merely because another contrary opinion was possible on the basis of material on record. As stated earlier, the view taken by the learned Magistrate is a reasonable and possible view hence, no interference is called for. Application for leave to file appeal is rejected. (SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.) (SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.) (SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.)