1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT NAGPUR Criminal Application (APPA) No.578/2011 Suraj Baburao Patil Vs. State of Mah. and another. =-=-=---=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Office Notes, Office Memorandum of Coram appearances, Court's orders or directions & Registrar's orders. Court's or Judges Order =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- CORAM : U.V. BAKRE, J. DATED : 14/9/2011. Heard Mr. D.I. Jain, learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. P.D. Kothari, learned APP for the respondent no.1 and Mr. C.A. Joshi, learned counsel for respondent no.2. Perused the impugned judgment and order. Admittedly, cheques bearing No. 771781 and 771782 have been issued by respondent no.2 and they were presented to the bank within the period of validity but were dis-honoured for reason, “funds insufficient”. There is no dispute about the fact that legal notice under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act was duly issued and within the prescribed time limit, the complaint was filed. It seems that the Trial Judge has held that the applicant could not prove that he has given hand-loan of Rs. 30,000/-to the respondent no.2. However, it is seen that the impact of presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act has not been considered by the Trial Judge. There are, therefore, arguable points. 2 Hence, in the interest of justice, leave as prayed for, is granted. The appeal is admitted. Call for record and proceedings. Action under Section 390 of Code of Criminal Procedure. JUDGE Ambulkar.