1 SNS IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MUMBAI APPELLATE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.226 OF 2011 Mr. Aklesh T. Bhansali ...Applicant. v/s. Mr. Himanshu A. Doshi & Anr. ...Respondents. Mr. Parvez Ubharay ,adv. For the Applicant. Mr. S.B.Dhotre, adv. For the Respondent No.1. Smt. M.R.Tidke, APP for the R.No.2. CORAM : J.H. BHATIA, J. DATED : MAY 5, 2011. P.C. 1 Heard. The Criminal Appeal No.78 of 2010 filed by the present applicant against the conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act was heard and dismissed by the impugned order dated 15.4.2011. The order reveals that on the day when the matter was called for hearing, advocate for the applicant/appellant was absent and adjournment was sought, which was refused because on number of occasions, matter was adjourned at the request of the applicant/appellant or his counsel. Though it is difficult to find fault with the reasons given by the Sessions Court to proceed with the merits of the case as the advocate for the applicant/appellant was seeking adjournments after adjournments, still in the interest of justice, with consent of the learned 2 counsel for the respondent no.1/complainant, revision application is allowed and the impugned order passed by the appellate Court is hereby set aside subject to payment of cost of Rs.10,000/- by the applicant/appellant to the respondent no.1. Cost be deposited before the Sessions Court within one week. If cost is not deposited within one week, this revision application shall be deemed to have been dismissed. 2 After the cost is deposited within the stipulated period, parties shall appear before the Sessions Court on 9th June, 2011 and the appellate Court may fix any date according to its convenience for hearing his appeal. It is made clear that no adjournments shall be granted by the Sessions Court at the request of the applicant/appellant. (J.H. BHATIA,J.)