1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2828 OF 2009 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2827 OF 2009 Dhanraj Uttam Patil R/o. Sai Krupa Society, Plot No. 209, Bahubali Nagar, Behind V.W.S. College, Dhule, Tal. & Dist. Dhule. ....Applicant. Versus Rahul Atmaram Darghade R/o. Amar Nagar, Behind Manohar Talkies, Dhule, Tal. & Dist. Dhule. ....Respondent. Shri. R.S. Shinde h/f. Shri. N.L. Choudhari, Advocate for the applicant. Shri. S.P. Tiwari, Advocate for the respondent sole. CORAM : P.R. BORKAR, J. DATE : 22nd February, 2010 PER COURT : 1. Heard Shri. R.S. Shinde holding for Shri. N.L. Choudhari, Advocate for applicant and Shri. S.P. Tiwari for respondent sole. 2. Criminal Application No. 2828/2009 is for condonation of delay of 420 days in filing an application for leave to file appeal against the order of acquittal. Admittedly, the applicant has filed S.C.C.No. 1053/2007 in 2 the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 7, Dhule, against the present respondent for committing offences punishable under section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act and under section 420 of Indian Penal Code. Said complaint came to be dismissed for default by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Court No. 7, Dhule by an order dated 18.4.2008. It is mentioned therein that the complainant was absent when called out. The accused was present. Already sufficient opportunity was given to the complainant. He remained absent for cross-examination and therefore, the complaint was dismissed under section 256 of Cr.P.C. 3. In Criminal Application No. 2828/2009, it is mentioned in para No. 2 that due to illness of the complainant/applicant, he could not approach his advocate and therefore, there was delay of 420 days. Neither the nature of illness nor any certificate is produced on record. So, it is clear from the evidence that even during the trial the complainant had remained absent and even after dismissal of the complaint, he did not immediately approach this Court. He has given vague reason for being absent in trial Court. Not being satisfied with the reasons given in the Criminal Application No. 2828/2009, these applications are dismissed. [ P.R. BORKAR, J. ] ssc/ca2828.09