* 1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 5402 OF 2009 Tatyasaheb Kore Warna Sahakari Sakhar Kharkhana Ltd ...............Applicant V/S. Chaturabai Dinkar Awaghade and anr. .............Respondents ­­­­­­­­­­ Mr. S.S. Patwardhar with Mr. Savagave ,advocate for applicant. Mr. Prakash Garge ,advocate for respondent no.1. Mrs. R.V. Newton, APP for State­respondent no.2. CORAM :­ S.C. DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATED :­ 7 th JANUARY, 2010. P.C. :­ 1. This application seeks leave to appeal against an order of acquittal recorded by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Panhala dated 6/2/2009. 2. The applicant is the original complaint in a complaint under Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act. 3. The only contention raised before me to challenge the order of * 2 * acquittal is that the trial judge was in complete error in holding that the complaint is not maintainable because the cheque in question has been presented 6 months from the date it was drawn. The submission is that the cheque bears the date as 31/10/2005 and therefore its presentation on 15/4/2006 cannot be said to be beyond the stipulated period. It was presented within the validity period, dishonoured and this is evident from the Bank Memo bearing dated 15/4/2006. Further, it has also come on record during the course of deposition of witnesses that the cheque is dated 31/10/2005 and not 11/10/2005. 4. With the able assistance of the counsel appearing for both sides, I have perused the application and the Annexures thereto including the impugned judgment. In the complaint, it is stated that the cheque is dated 11/10/2005. In paragraph­7 of the impugned judgment, the learned Judge while discussing the oral and documentary evidence has concluded that the cheque ought to have been presented within a period of 6 months from 11/10/2005 i.e. before 11/04/2006. However, in the complaint as also in the notice it is stated that the cheque is presented on 12/04/2006. There is another date of presentation mentioned as 25/04/2006. Further, reliance placed upon the bank memo before me itself would denote that it is dated 15/04/2006. In such circumstances, the view taken that the cheque is not presented within the validity period of 6 months is a possible view and * 3 * based upon the evidence adduced by the parties. In these circumstances, I am of the opinion that the judgment does not suffer from any perversity, so as to call for interference in the appellate jurisdiction. The application is accordingly dismissed. [S.C. DHARMADHIKARI, J]